11:00 AM

6:17-10113

Abraham Meza, Jr.

Chapter 7 #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

1/3/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 57.92 Trustee Expenses: $ 7.67

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Abraham Meza Jr. Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-18675

Alma Delia Ramos

Chapter 7 #2.00 Notice of Motion to set aside RE: Order Granting Motion for Relief From Stay Unlawful Detainer 21

CASE DISMISSED 12/14/17

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling: 1/3/18

BACKGROUND

On October 18, 2017, Alma Ramos ("Debtor") filed a skeletal Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On November 16, 2017, Santiago Properties, Inc. ("Landlord") filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay. On November 22, 2017, Debtor filed her opposition to Landlord’s motion. On December 1, 2017, the Court entered an order granting the motion.

On December 7, 2017, Debtor filed a motion to set aside the order granting relief from the automatic stay. Subsequently, on December 14, 2017, Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to appear at either of the first two meetings of creditors.

DISCUSSION

As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that the instant motion was served

11:00 AM

CONT...

Alma Delia Ramos

Chapter 7

improperly. Specifically, the motion was not served on the Trustee, UST, and was served to Landlord at a PO Box, instead of on Landlord’s attorney.

Additionally, the motion is blank – Debtor does not provide any argument or evidence as required by Local Rule 9013-(1)(c)(3). Because of the absence of any argument or evidence, and, additionally, because of the improper service, the Court cannot grant Debtor’s motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court will DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alma Delia Ramos Pro Se

Movant(s):

Alma Delia Ramos Pro Se

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-26277

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7 #3.00 Chapter 7 Trustees Motion for Order Revoking Abandonment of Real Property of the Estate

Docket 222

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

notes that "mistake" as a grounds for relief is tied to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(1) and, as noted earlier, the Trustee is time-barred from moving under Rule 60(b)(1). See In re Sas, 488 B.R. 178, 184 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2013); In re Johnson, 361 B.R. 903, 910

(Bankr. D. Mont. 2007) ("The Court will not consider whether the trustee abandoned the assets as a result of mistake or inadvertence that may allow the Court to consider the elements of Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 9024, incorporating Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b) (1), as the motion to reopen and the motion for turnover have clearly been filed more than one year after Debtors’ case was closed on June [] 27, 2003.").

Additionally, the Court notes that Trustee’s abandonment of the Property was not a result of mistake or inadvertence. See In re Bartels, 449 B.R. 355 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2011); Matter of Alt, 39 B.R. 902 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1984) (both discussing mistake and inadvertence in the context of abandonment of property). Trustee has provided no evidence that he mistakenly calculated the estate’s interest in the Property or that any other error caused the abandonment of the Property. Instead, the "mistake" alleged by Trustee is that he was unaware that he would receive an offer to purchase the property that appears to be disproportional to the value of the interest being purchased. If Trustee was not time-barred from pursuing the desired relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(1), the circumstances identified by Trustee would not constitute the "mistake or inadvertence" contemplated by the provision.

Finally, the Court notes that the argument offered by Trustee under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(6) is unclear and less than convincing. In the original motion, Trustee seems to assert that the estate, the buyer, and the Debtor would all benefit from a revocation of the abandonment. After Debtor opposed the motion, Trustee’s appears to have switched his position, although the details of Trustee’s new argument are less than clear. Trustee states that: "[h]ad the Trustee known before that Rudat or the proposed Buyer (Rudat’s stepmother) were interested in purchasing the Property subject to existing liens, the Trustee would not have abandoned it." While this is undoubtedly an accurate statement, these circumstances do not warrant relief under Rule 60(b)(6). To hold otherwise would be to create an exception that swallows the rule, opening up the possibility of abuse in a variety of situations.

At the time of the abandonment of the Property, the Trustee had conducted an investigation of the Property and determined that the property was of inconsequential value to the estate. There is no indication that the evidence relied upon by Trustee at

11:00 AM

CONT... Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

that time was materially inaccurate, and it appears that the Trustee’s determination was correct. When a trustee makes a determination that an asset of the estate is of inconsequential value and abandons that assets, but later attempts to revoke the abandonment of the asset to allows for its administration, it is logically necessary that one of two things must be true: (1) the trustee’s original determination that the asset was of inconsequential value must have been erroneous; or (2) the proposed buyer must be offering consequential value for an interest of inconsequential value. In the former situation, the trustee may potentially use Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(1).

Trustee’s position that the latter situation is covered by Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(6) would seem to create a situation where the Trustee could secure revocation of abandonment of an asset in virtually all situations. But, as noted earlier and acknowledged by Trustee, abandonment of an asset is final except in limited circumstances. See generally Ginsberg & Martin on Bankruptcy § 5.06[B][2] (5th ed. 2017) ("A trustee’s abandonment is final and irrevocable unless based on fraud.").

Because the position advanced by Trustee would appear to create an exception that swallows the rule, and because Trustee has not pointed to any exceptional circumstances that would warrant relief under Rule 60(b)(6), the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Frederick Biehl Represented By

Daryl L Binkley - DISBARRED - Steven L Bryson

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Charles Frederick Biehl

Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui Leonard M Shulman

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui

Leonard M Shulman

2:00 PM

6:16-19799

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01006 Pringle v. Qadir et al

#4.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by John P. Pringle against Walie A. Qadir, Marym Qadir, Najlla Qadir. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 3/8/17, 6/28/17, 8/30/17, 11/1/17 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 12/29/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal

Defendant(s):

Walie A. Qadir Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal

Marym Qadir Represented By

Batkhand Zoljargal

Najlla Qadir Represented By

Batkhand Zoljargal

Plaintiff(s):

John P. Pringle Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay

Anthony A Friedman

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#5.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation, Jerry Wang against Douglas J Roger MD. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 68 Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury, 67 Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 41 Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e) (Holding date)

From: 11/26/14, 1/26/15, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 1/27/16, 6/29/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16, 2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 7/31/17, 10/4/17

Also #6 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Jerry Wang Represented By

Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

A. Cisneros Represented By

Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#6.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Claims of Plaintiff, Jerry Wang, and to Strike and for a More Definite Statement as to Plaintiff, Revere Financial Corporation

(Holding date)

From: 11/5/14, 12/3/14, 12/15/14, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 1/27/16 6/29/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16, 2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 7/31/17,

10/4/17

Also #5 EH

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/20/17

Tentative Ruling:

07/31/2017

BACKGROUND

On October 25, 2013, Douglas Jay Roger ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. On September 22, 2014, Revere Financial Corporation ("Revere") and Jerry Wang ("Receiver") filed a complaint for determination of the dischargeability of debts pursuant to §§ 523(a)(2)(B), 523(a)(2)(A), 523(a)(4)(A), 523(a)(4) & 523(a)(6); and objecting to the Debtor’s discharge pursuant to §§727(a)(3), 727(a)(4)(A), 727(a) (4)(B), 727(a)(5), & 727(a)(7) ("Complaint").

On October 6, 2014, the Debtor filed a Motion to Dismiss, to Strike, and for a More Definite Statement ("Motion"). The operative pleadings are as follows:

Memorandum by Jerry Wang in Opposition to Motion (Docket No. 13);
Memorandum by Secured Creditor Revere in Opposition to Motion (Docket No. 14);
Reply of Debtor to Jerry Wang’s Opposition (Docket No. 15);
Reply of Debtor to Revere & Jerry Wang’s Opposition (Docket No. 16);
Debtor’s Supplemental Brief (Docket No. 19); and
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger
Chapter 7 Trustee’s Opposition to Motion (Docket No. 34).

Chapter 7

DISCUSSION
Civil Rule 12(b)(6) standards
Under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), made applicable in adversary proceedings through Rule 7012, a bankruptcy court may dismiss a complaint if it fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." In reviewing a Civil Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the trial court must accept as true all facts alleged in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir.
2001). However, the trial court need not accept as true conclusory allegations in a complaint or legal characterizations cast in the form of factual allegations. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555–56, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007);
Hartman v. Gilead Scis., Inc. (In re Gilead Scis. Sec. Litig.), 536 F.3d 1049, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).

To avoid dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must aver in the complaint "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173
L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). It is axiomatic that a claim cannot be plausible when it has no legal basis. A dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) may be based either on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or on the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory. Johnson
1. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008).
  The Debtor asserts primarily that (1) the Receiver has no "authority" to bring the action; and (2) to the extent that Revere’s claim for damages includes fees and expenses incurred by the Receiver in its claim for damages, such claim is not proper because neither the Debtor nor Revere is obligated for the Receiver’s fees and expenses. To the extent the Debtor prevails on this second argument, the Debtor also requests that the claim of Revere for fees and expenses incurred by the Receiver be stricken, and that Revere be required to set forth a more definite statement of its damages.
  1. The Receiver’s "Authority" to Bring the Action Against the Debtor
    
    A. The Receiver Needed Authority from the Appointing Court to bring an
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    Action
    Once a court appoints a receiver, "[i]t is the rule that: ‘The functions and powers
    
    Chapter 7
    of a receiver are controlled by statute, by the order appointing him, and by orders subsequently made by the court. He has no powers beyond those so
    conferred.’ Downtown Sunnyvale Residential LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. H038572, 2015 WL 263727, at *9 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 20, 2015) (citing 42 Cal.Jur.2d, Receivers, § 73; and see authority there collected.)" (Morand v. Superior Court (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 347, 351 (Morand ).) "Where a receiver's powers and duties are not directly prescribed by statute, they are dependent upon the court's order of appointment." (Nulaid Farmers Assn. v. LaTorre (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 788, 791.) A receiver's powers " ‘may be expanded or contracted by subsequent court order.’ " (Resolution Trust Corp. v. Bayside Developers (9th Cir.1994) 43 F.3d 1230, 1242 (Resolution Trust Corp.), citing to Cal–American Income Property Fund VII v. Brown Development Corp. (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 268, 273 (Cal–American ).)
    
    The Debtor cites to Cal. C.C.P. § 568 (CCP 568) and to Morand regarding the powers of receivers for the proposition that the Receiver has no authority to bring the instant action. CCP 568 provides, in pertinent part, that
    
    The receiver has, under the control of the Court, power to bring and defend actions in his own name, as receiver; to take and keep possession of the property, to receive rents, collect debts, to compound for and compromise the same, to make transfers, and generally to do such acts respecting the property as the Court may authorize.
    
    The Debtor argues that because the order appointing the Receiver did not enumerate the authority to file lawsuits as a power authorized by the Court, that the Receiver is without such authority until such time as he receives authorization from the Superior Court to file this action. Although authorities are scant, the authorities cited by the Debtor and found by this Court support the conclusion that for the Receiver to institute an action, the order appointing the Receiver must at a minimum contain language generally, if not specifically, authorizing/directing the commencement of actions. See e.g.
    Harting v. Cebrian, 10 Cal. App. 2d 10, 51 P.2d 195 (1935).
    
    The Receiver, for his part, argues that he was directed to manage the
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    receivership estate, including to "take possession, custody, and control" of various assets that comprise the "Receivership Estate" and to "[c]ollect all proceeds of the Receivership Estate, whether equity, income, payments, rents, revenue, sale, or otherwise." (Receiver Opp’n at 2). This language, however, is insufficient for the purpose of authorizing the Receiver to initiate legal actions. See e.g. Harting v.
    Cebrian, 10 Cal. App. 2d 10, 51 P.2d 195 (1935). In support of its position, the
    Receiver cites Title Ins. & Tr. Co. v. Grider, 152 Cal. 746, 94 P. 601 (1908). However, Grider dealt with two issues not present in the instant action – first, an attack on the underlying basis for the appointment of a receiver, and second, an assertion that the property at issue was not property that the Receiver was authorized to collect. Neither issue resolves the issue of whether the language of a receivership order authorizes the initiation of an action.
    
    Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the failure of the Receiver to allege that the receivership order provided him with the authority to initiate actions on behalf of the Receivership Estate is grounds for dismissal.
    
    Although moot, assuming the Receiver did have authority to file the Complaint, as to the Receiver’s claim for damages the Receiver has clarified that it does not seek its own fees, expenses, and costs. Instead, it seeks recovery of receivership assets. To the extent the Receiver’s claim for damages is limited to recovery of assets of the receivership estate, such damages appear to fall squarely within the bounds of the Order Appointing Receiver. As such, the Receiver would need to amend the Complaint to clarify that its request for damages is limited to recovering assets of the receivership estate.
  2. Revere is Not Liable to the Receiver for Fees and Costs and Thus Cannot Seek to Recover Such Fees and Costs as Damages

The Debtor argues that Revere has no basis to include fees and expenses of the Receiver. In response, Revere has cited to authorities indicating that in the event that the receivership estate is insufficient to pay the Receiver’s fees and expenses, courts have, in some cases, found third parties liable to the receivers for the deficiency. The Debtor asserts that Atl. Tr. Co. v. Chapman, 208 U.S. 360, 374, 28 S. Ct. 406, 410, 52

L. Ed. 528 (1908), is dispositive of this issue.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

The Supreme Court, in Atlantic Trust, acknowledged that third parties may be

Chapter 7

held liable in certain circumstances but indicated that such cases were rare. The Supreme Court stated, in pertinent part:

It is true that cases are cited in which the party bringing a suit in which a receiver is appointed has been held liable for expenses incurred by the receiver in excess of the proceeds arising from the sale of the property. But in most, if not in all, of those cases, the circumstances were peculiar and were such as to make it right and equitable, in the opinion of the court, that that should be done.

Id. As the Debtor acknowledges, the Supreme Court did not hold that a third party could under no circumstances be liable for a receiver’s fees and expenses. Instead, the Debtor asserts only that the specific cases cited by Revere in which a third party was held liable are not applicable to the facts alleged in the instant case. Here, the Debtor does not address the broad language of the Commercial Security Agreement (Complaint at Ex. 3 at 42) in which Revere has pointed to provisions of Debtor’s loan documentation, which may provide Revere with a basis to recover for fees and expenses owed to the Receiver for his services. However, notwithstanding this point, the Complaint does not include allegations that the receivership estate will not have funds to fully compensate the Receiver such that Revere could claim any liability for his costs and fees. Nor does the Complaint set forth a claim based on the contractual language cited by Revere in its opposition. As such, the Court finds that the Complaint does not contain sufficient factual allegations to support a plausible claim for damages based on the Receiver’s fees and costs.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to dismissal of the Receiver, and as to striking Revere’s claim for damages to the extent it includes fees and costs owed to the Receiver.

The Motion is DENIED as to it request for dismissal without leave to amend. There has been no showing by Debtor to justify dismissal with prejudice. The Receiver and Revere shall have 60 days from the date of entry of the order on the Motion to amend the Complaint.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Party Information

Chapter 7

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Jerry Wang Represented By

Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano

A. Cisneros Represented By

Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

3:00 PM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#7.00 Motion for Disqualification for Cause Discrimination, Hate Crime (Black), etc., et al against Judge Meredith A. Jury

From: 11/29/17 EH

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Represented By Nancy Korompis

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

3:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-20114

Frank Garcia and Susan Garcia

Chapter 13 #1.00 Motion for Setting Property Value EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

01/04/2018

Summary of the Motion:

Notice: Proper

Opposition: None

Collateral: 2011 Chevrolet Colorado

Secured Lien Asserted: $16,365.91 by Mechanics Bank (per POC)

Debtor’s Assertion of FMV: $9,851 (Kelly Blue Book Value, Ex. D)

Standard:

Upon motion of a party in interest, the bankruptcy court may determine the value of a secured claim. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3012. Pursuant to § 506(a), an allowed claim may be bifurcated into its secured and unsecured components according to the value of the collateral. 11 U.S.C. § 506; Shook v. CBIC (In re Shook), 278 B.R. 815, 822 (9th Cir. BAP 2002).

analysis

Debtors assert that the fair market value of the Property is $9,851 based on an internet appraisal obtained from Kelly Blue Book. Creditor, though properly served, has not provided either evidence to controvert or objections to the evidence of the Debtors. As such, the Court finds that Claim No. 1 shall be bifurcated. The Court has derived the amount of the secured and unsecured portions from the figures provided in the proof of claim of Mechanics Bank (Claim No. 1) which asserts a secured claim for

$16,365.91. The Motion, in contrast, asserts that the claim amount is $16,322 (without explanation). As the Debtors have provided no evidence or objection to controvert the amount claimed in Claim No. 1, the Court will bifurcate Claim No. 1 into a secured claim in the amount of $9,851 and an unsecured claim in the amount of $6,514.91.

12:30 PM

CONT...

Frank Garcia and Susan Garcia

Chapter 13

Additionally, LBR 9013-1(h) provides that failure to timely respond to a motion may be deemed consent to the granting of the motion. Thus, as an alternative basis for granting the Motion, the Court deems Creditor’s failure to file opposition as consent.

Tentative:

The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCE WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Frank Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Susan Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-18388

Gregorio Orozco Sotelo

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/16/17, 12/14/17

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gregorio Orozco Sotelo Represented By

Lisa F Collins-Williams

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-18780

Jules Andre Nelson

Chapter 13 #3.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/29/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jules Andre Nelson Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Movant(s):

Jules Andre Nelson Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-18786

Edgar Raymond Domingue, Sr.

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/30/17

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Edgar Raymond Domingue Sr. Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19253

Arnel L Ganzon

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion to vacate dismissal and reinstate chapter 13 case EH

Docket 20

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/5/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Arnel L Ganzon Pro Se

Movant(s):

Arnel L Ganzon Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19300

Jennifer Marie Silva

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/14/17

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/18/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jennifer Marie Silva Represented By Raymond Perez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19605

Victor Manuel Buelna and Adriana Alvizo

Chapter 13 #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Victor Manuel Buelna Represented By David Lozano

Joint Debtor(s):

Adriana Alvizo Represented By David Lozano

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19611

Larry Gene Hannah and Susan Harris Hannah

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion to Avoid JUNIOR LIEN with BANK OF AMERICA N.A. Also #9

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

01/04/2018

Summary of the Motion:

Notice: Proper

Opposition: None

Address: 15371 Mondamon Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

First trust deed: $288,533.66 with Ditech (per Ex. A)

Second trust deed (to be avoided): $53,654.38 with BOFA (per Ex. B)

Fair market value: $269,900 (BPO, Ex. D)

TENTATIVE

Based on the Debtor’s evidence of the value of the Property, of the priority of the liens encumbering the Property, and proof that the Motion was properly served, which supports the Debtor’s request to avoid the junior lien on the Property, the Court is inclined to GRANT upon receipt of a chapter 13 discharge.

APPEARANCE IS WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued to the next Chapter 13 calendar.

PREVAILING PARTY SHOULD SUBMIT THE FORM ORDER WITHIN 7 DAYS, A BLANK COPY OF WHICH MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM THE FORMS SECTION ON THE COURT’S WEBSITE.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Larry Gene Hannah Represented By

12:30 PM

CONT...

Larry Gene Hannah and Susan Harris Hannah

Todd L Turoci

Chapter 13

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Harris Hannah Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Larry Gene Hannah Represented By Todd L Turoci

Susan Harris Hannah Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19611

Larry Gene Hannah and Susan Harris Hannah

Chapter 13 #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Also #8 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Larry Gene Hannah Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Harris Hannah Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19614

Alfredo Manzo Arrieta and Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta

Chapter 13 #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Alfredo Manzo Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19617

Maria Isabel Alvarado

Chapter 13 #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Maria Isabel Alvarado Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19619

Erik Emanuel Manlove

Chapter 7 #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 12/4/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Erik Emanuel Manlove Represented By Yoon O Ham

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19628

Alejandro Salinas, Jr.

Chapter 13 #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Alejandro Salinas Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19633

Lourdes Watters

Chapter 13 #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/8/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lourdes Watters Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19661

Edward James Singelyn

Chapter 13 #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Edward James Singelyn Represented By Bruce Babcock

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19679

Rafael Alvarado

Chapter 13 #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/11/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rafael Alvarado Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19708

Chiu Ng

Chapter 13 #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Chiu Ng Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19719

Frank J Cordova

Chapter 13 #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Frank J Cordova Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19722

Daniel Verduzco

Chapter 13 #19.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with FCI Lender Services, 2005 Residential Trust 3- 2, Countrywide Bank FSB

Also #20 EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

01/04/2018

Summary of the Motion:

Notice: Proper

Opposition: Yes

Address: 24420 Robie Ct in Moreno Valley, CA 92551

First trust deed: $277,791.30 with Bank of America

Second trust deed (to be avoided): $115,756.89 with 2005 Residential Trust 3-2 ("Creditor")

Fair market value: $270,000 (Appraisal)

TENTATIVE

Creditor by its opposition requests a continuance of at least 30 days to obtain a verified appraisal of the Property.

Debtor argues that because the Motion must be filed and heard prior to confirmation of the chapter 13 plan, a continuance of the Motion cannot be granted. However, the Debtor presumes that the plan will be confirmed on January 4, 2018. It is common practice to permit secured creditors an opportunity to obtain an appraisal prior to ruling on a motion to avoid junior lien. Debtor provides no authority for the proposition that such a continuance would be unjustified in circumstances such as these nor has the Debtor articulated any legal prejudice that would result from the continuance.

In sum, the Court finds no merit in the Debtor’s reply. A continuance of the Motion

12:30 PM

CONT...

Daniel Verduzco

Chapter 13

for the appraisal is warranted.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19722

6:17-19802

Graciela Salcedo

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/18/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Graciela Salcedo Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19808

Marcus Edward Kanavalov, Sr

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Theresa Susanne Ysiano Represented By Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-19894

William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker

Chapter 13 #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

William Edward Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Carla Sue Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:17-18258

Francisco R Tamayo

Chapter 13 #35.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/9/17, 11/30/17

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Francisco R Tamayo Represented By Alla Tenina

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:13-13052

Charles R Campbell, II and Ruth Urie-Campbell

Chapter 13 #36.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/14/17

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Charles R Campbell II Represented By

Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith

Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Ruth Urie-Campbell Represented By

Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith

Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:13-29303

William Raymond Black, Jr. and Sanci Jo Black

Chapter 13 #37.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 86

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

William Raymond Black Jr. Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Sanci Jo Black Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:14-23150

Vivian Munson

Chapter 13 #38.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/21/17

Docket 180

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Movant(s):

Rod (MH) Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:15-12176

Bonnie Jean Conant

Chapter 13 #39.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/21/17

Docket 86

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Bonnie Jean Conant Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:15-21412

Adrienne J Garcelli and Paul Garcelli

Chapter 13 #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 105

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adrienne J Garcelli Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Paul Garcelli Represented By

Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:16-13405

Ashley Nicole Ortiz

Chapter 13 #41.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/27/17

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ashley Nicole Ortiz Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:16-15304

Fabiola Puttre

Chapter 13 #42.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/14/17, 12/21/17

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

1/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fabiola Puttre Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:31 PM

6:17-17061

Louise Laster

Chapter 13 #43.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Louise Laster Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:12-33658

Jose Luis Navarro and Alma Gloria Navarro

Chapter 13 #1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9107 Bold Ruler Lane, Riverside, CA 92509-3128

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA

From: 11/28/17 EH

Docket 79

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/29/17

Tentative Ruling:

11/28/2017

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT authority to offer loan workout options, and request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Luis Navarro Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Alma Gloria Navarro Represented By Todd L Turoci

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Jose Luis Navarro and Alma Gloria Navarro

Chapter 13

HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By

Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)

10:00 AM

6:13-28503

Jeffrey K Oliver and Holly R Oliver

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 23031 Vought St, Moreno Valley, CA 92553

MOVANT: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 108

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Limited

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(4) based on an unauthorized transfer of interest in the property on the petition date.

Based on the evidence presented in the response, the Court does not, however, make a finding that Debtor was involved in a scheme to hinder, delay or defraud creditors.

GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it appears that the co-debtor stay is inapplicable. To the extent the co-debtor stay is applicable, no co-debtor has been served with the instant motion. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 10. DENY requests under ¶¶ 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jeffrey K Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

10:00 AM

CONT...

Jeffrey K Oliver and Holly R Oliver

Chapter 13

Joint Debtor(s):

Holly R Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Represented By

Jennifer C Wong

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:14-14942

Nicholas M. Morales and Bertha A. Galvan

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 804 Tehama Ct Lake Elsinore CA 92530

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK

From: 10/31/17, 11/28/17 EH

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/27/17

Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:

10/31/2017

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nicholas M. Morales Represented By George J Paukert

Joint Debtor(s):

Bertha A. Galvan Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Nicholas M. Morales and Bertha A. Galvan

George J Paukert

Chapter 13

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

Armin M Kolenovic

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-10334

Alberto H. Garcia and Gina Caceres

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43275 Corte Almeria, Temecula, CA 92592

MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alberto H. Garcia Represented By Carey C Pickford

Joint Debtor(s):

Gina Caceres Represented By

Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By

Jennifer C Wong

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-12404

Anthony E Turkson

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12016 Quantico Dr, Riverside, CA 92505

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

Docket 89

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By April Harriott Keith Labell Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-13218

Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2008 Rampage 240 Travel Trailer

MOVANT: BANK OF THE WEST

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/8/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

BANK OF THE WEST Represented By

Mary Ellmann Tang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-13233

Sherry Ann Beardsley

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1041 W 27th St, San Bernardino, CA 92405-3121

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Movant to confirm that arrears have been cured. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sherry Ann Beardsley Represented By Jeffrey D Larkin

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Mark D Estle Bruce E Brown

Beverly Lorraine Evans Dane W Exnowski

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-10088

Beatriz Esqueda

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17242 Russo Ct, Fontana, CA 92336

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY relief from the § 1301(a) stay because the motion was not served on any co-debtor. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Beatriz Esqueda Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By

Kristin A Zilberstein Jennifer C Wong

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Beatriz Esqueda

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-10101

Rizal Ligayo

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Rav4 (VIN 2T3WFREV1FW138281)

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

From: 12/19/17 EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

12/19/2017

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). DENY request for relief from the automatic under § 362(d)(2) because the Court does not have evidence that the vehicle is not necessary for an effective reorganization. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay for failure to serve co-debtor.

GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rizal Ligayo Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By

Austin P Nagel

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rizal Ligayo

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-10460

Julio Cesar Cacho and Rosalie Ann Cacho

Chapter 13 #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 24859 N Matterhorn Ct.,Crestline, CA 92325

MOVANT: BROKER SOLUTIONS, INC

Docket 25

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/8/18

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Julio Cesar Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosalie Ann Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Movant(s):

Broker Solutions, Inc. dba New Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Julio Cesar Cacho and Rosalie Ann Cacho

Erin M McCartney

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-11131

Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles

Chapter 13 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 935 Goldenrod St., Corona, CA 92882 .

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Limited

Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions, and Debtors to explain why evidence that they are current was not attached to motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Brandye N Foreman

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-11831

Gregory Dwight Vit

Chapter 13 #12.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 46048 Paseo Gallante, Temecula, CA 92592

MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

From: 11/28/17 EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:

11/28/2017

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to indicate whether arrears have been cured or alternatively, whether APO agreement has been reached.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gregory Dwight Vit Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Bank Of New York Mellon FKA Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-13804

John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris

Chapter 13 #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Mazda 5

MOVANT: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John P Morris Represented By

Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Cassandra M Morris Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-14588

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng

Chapter 13 #14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Toyota Corolla VIN: 5YFBURHE1HP579809

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the § 1301(a) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-14906

Roger James Gardner

Chapter 13 #15.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 920 Paseo El Mirador, Palm Springs CA 92262

MOVANT: LOUIS J SILVESTRI AND LINDA SILVESTRI, TRUSTEE OF THE LOUIS J SILVESTRI AND LINDA SILVESTRI FAMILY TRUST EST. 2/5/81

From: 9/12/17, 10/31/17 EH

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/4/17

Tentative Ruling:

09/12/2017

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Movant has established cause to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) based on the Debtor’s failure to make postpetition payments and GRANT waiver of 4001(a)

stay the request for termination of the co-debtor stay. Parties to discuss adequate protection and timing and likelihood of sale.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Roger James Gardner Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Louis J Silvestri and Linda Silvestri, Represented By
Julian K Bach
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Roger James Gardner

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15043

Sandra Lou Harter

Chapter 7

#16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9628 7th Street, Phelan, California 92371

MOVANT: QUICKEN LOANS INC

EH

Docket 24
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/22/17
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford
Movant(s):
Quicken Loans Inc. Represented By Bonni S Mantovani
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15822

Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera

Chapter 13

#17.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3015 Pepper Tree Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92404

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

From: 11/14/17, 11/28/17 EH
Docket 49
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/26/17
Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
11/14/2017

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Alfredo Loera Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Veronica O Loera Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Movant(s):

Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera

Paul Y Lee

Chapter 13
Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-16699

Cindy Louise Lawson

Chapter 13

#18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2013 BMW 3 SERIES)

MOVANT: ALLY FINANCIAL

EH

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders
Movant(s):
Ally Financial Inc. Represented By Adam N Barasch
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18080

Esperanza O Hernandez

Chapter 7

#19.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2006 Cadillac DTS Automobile; Vin: 1G6KD57936U183073

MOVANT: KINECTA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Esperanza O Hernandez Represented By Ronald L Brownson
Movant(s):
Kinecta Federal Credit Union Represented By Mark S Blackman
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18579

Carmen Lopez

Chapter 7

#20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1130 Rose Circle, Corona, CA 92882

MOVANT: PROF-2013-S3 LEGAL TITLE TRUST II, BY US BANK NATIONAL ASSOC, AS LEGAL TITLE TRUSTEE

EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 9. DENY requests under ¶¶ 7 and 10 for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carmen Lopez Represented By Roberto Gil
Movant(s):
PROF-2013-S3 LEGAL TITLE Represented By Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18957

Rodolfo Zendejas

Chapter 7

#21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12234 Avenue C, Yucaipa, CA 92399

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). DENY request under § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rodolfo Zendejas Represented By Robert R Tilton
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
Kelly M Raftery
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19231

Jose Lewis Bobadilla, Jr.

Chapter 7

#22.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: Property known as 6927 Cypress Grove Dr, Riverside, CA 92506-6216

MOVANT: PROF-2013-S3 LEGAL TITLE TRUST IV

EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose Lewis Bobadilla Jr. Represented By Gary S Saunders
Movant(s):
PROF-2013-S3 Legal Title Trust IV Represented By
Darlene C Vigil
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19249

Horace Louis Willliams and Arda Minette Willliams

Chapter 7

#23.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 18557 Pinecone Lane, Riverside, CA 92504

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Horace Louis Willliams Represented By Joel M Feinstein
Joint Debtor(s):
Arda Minette Willliams Represented By Joel M Feinstein
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Horace Louis Willliams and Arda Minette Willliams

Chapter 7
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19263

Rosalba Orea and Constantino Orea

Chapter 7

#24.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 31413 Kailua Drive, Winchester, CA 92596

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT request for relief under § 362(d)(4) based on multiple bankruptcy filings affecting the property. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, 10 and 12.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rosalba Orea Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Constantino Orea Pro Se
Movant(s):
Bank Of America, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee Jennifer C Wong
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Rosalba Orea and Constantino Orea

Chapter 7
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19439

Jason James Popken

Chapter 7

#25.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Dodge Challenger, VIN: 2C3DZC98HH527411

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jason James Popken Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. dba Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19617

Maria Isabel Alvarado

Chapter 13

#26.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 161 West 77th Street, Los Angeles, CA 90003

MOVANT: FORBIX CAPITAL CORP

CASE DISMISSED 1/4/18

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on multiple filings affecting the property and an unauthorized transfer of an interest.
GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY requests under ¶ 4, 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown. GRANT request under ¶ 10 upon recording of a copy of this order or giving appropriate notice of its entirety in compliance with applicable nonbankruptcy law.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria Isabel Alvarado Pro Se
Movant(s):
Forbix Capital Corp. Represented By Robert Reganyan
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Maria Isabel Alvarado

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19653

Lisa Yvonne Mellado

Chapter 7

#27.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Chrysler 300, Vin 2C3CCACG5CH249871

MOVANT: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lisa Yvonne Mellado Represented By Mona V Patel
Movant(s):
SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Represented By
Paul V Reza
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19708

Chiu Ng

Chapter 13

#28.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1353 W. Mill Street, #110, San Bernardino, Ca

MOVANT: WINDCHIME PROPERTIES LP

CASE DISMISSED 1/4/18

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT request for relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
based on multiple filings affecting the property. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 9. DENY request under ¶ 7 for lack of cause shown. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because the motion was not served on any co-debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chiu Ng Pro Se

Movant(s):

WIND CHIME PROPERTIES, LP Represented By

Helen G Long

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Chiu Ng

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-19856

Eduardo Galvan

Chapter 13 #29.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: Property known as 980 N. Pampas Ave., Rialto, CA 92376

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/18/17

Tentative Ruling:

NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Eduardo Galvan Pro Se
Movant(s):
U.S. BANK NATIONAL Represented By Darlene C Vigil
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20147

Gilbert Richard Enriquez and Lisa Lynn Enriquez

Chapter 13

#30.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 13470 Preciado Avenue, Chino, CA 91710

MOVANT: GILBERT AND LISA ENRIQUEZ

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINUING the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gilbert Richard Enriquez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Lynn Enriquez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Movant(s):
Gilbert Richard Enriquez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
10:00 AM
CONT...

Gilbert Richard Enriquez and Lisa Lynn Enriquez

Chapter 13
Lisa Lynn Enriquez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani Raj T Wadhwani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20404

Atina Castro

Chapter 7

#30.10 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1512 E. Highland Court, Ontario, CA

MOVANT: HONG YU FU

EH

Docket 7
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Atina Castro Pro Se
Movant(s):
Hong Yu Fu Represented By
Helen G Long
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-19965

Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val

Chapter 11

#31.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
(2) Requiring Status Report EH
Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Represented By Odeha L Warren
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#32.00 CONT Motion to Approve Use of Cash Collateral From: 12/6/17
Also #33 EH
Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#33.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
1. Requiring Status Report Also #32
  EH
  
  Docket 48
  
  Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
10:00 AM
6:17-18509

James Alexander Gago

Chapter 7

#1.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Kia Motors Finance re: 2013 Kia Optima

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
James Alexander Gago Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18597

Karla Erika Garcia Salcido

Chapter 7

#2.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation Re: 2015 Nissan Sentra

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Karla Erika Garcia Salcido Pro Se
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18707

Shamicka N Jackson

Chapter 7

#3.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and CarMax Auto Finance RE: 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid $18,977.94

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Shamicka N Jackson Represented By Daniel King
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18859

Francisco Jose Vasquez

Chapter 7

#4.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and LBS Financial Credit Union Re: 2014 Suzuki C90 (Motorcycle)

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Francisco Jose Vasquez Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18909

Deborah Voorhis Harmon

Chapter 7

#5.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Toyota Motor Credit Corporation re: 2014 Toyota FJ 4x4

EH

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Deborah Voorhis Harmon Represented By Douglas A Plazak
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander
10:00 AM
6:17-19074

Carol Olvera Rosales

Chapter 7

#6.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Re: 2015 Toyota Yaris

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carol Olvera Rosales Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:09-30020

William Scott Graham and Rebecca Sue Graham

Chapter 7

#7.00 CONT Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation From: 11/29/17
EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:
01/10/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee, and Special Counsel have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1.

Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees:
$3,695.78
Trustee Expenses:
$19.81
Special Counsel Fees:
$11,193.96
Special Counsel Costs:
$3,743.20
Trustee GC Fees:
$5,849.36
Trustee GC Costs:
$1,217.78

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

11/29/2017
11:00 AM
CONT...

William Scott Graham and Rebecca Sue Graham

Chapter 7

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee, have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1.

The only receipts in this case were generated through a settlement approved by the Court on June 13, 2017 [Dkt No. 49; settlement motion, Dkt. No. 46] Paragraph 11 of the settlement motion’s statement of facts states the following:

The application also provided that payment of the Fees and Expenses shall be subject to the terms of the application and the approval of the Bankruptcy Court after the filing of either a combined motion for Bankruptcy Court approval of the settlement and the payments of the Fees and Expenses or a separate fee application in accordance with 11 U.S.C. §§ 328 and 330 and Local Bankruptcy Rules.

Paragraph 12 of the settlement motion states the following:

By an order entered on April 20, 2017, the Court granted the application but modified the terms of employment by providing that the payments of the Fees and Expenses shall be subject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court after the filing of a separate fee application in accordance with 11 U.S.C. §§ 328 and 330 and Local Bankruptcy Rules.

As acknowledged by Trustee, this Court’s order authorizing the employment of the Phillips Law Firm as special counsel explicitly required, through the Court’s modification of Trustee’s proposed order, the filing of a separate fee application if Trustee was to make any payments to the firm. Yet, such an application was not filed.

In the absence of the required fee application, the Court cannot approve the Trustee’s proposed distribution to the extent that that proposed distribution includes payments to the Phillips Law Firm. The Trustee’s final report, however, does not appear to contemplate payments to the Phillips Law Firm, but, rather, it appears that such payments have already been made in violation of this Court’s order.
11:00 AM
CONT...

William Scott Graham and Rebecca Sue Graham

Chapter 7

Given that the majority of the gross receipts in this case appear to have already been paid from the estate in violation of Court order, no further distributions can be authorized at this time.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
William Scott Graham Represented By Edward G Topolski
Joint Debtor(s):
Rebecca Sue Graham Represented By Edward G Topolski
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Robert A Hessling
11:00 AM
6:16-15813

John E. Tackett and Ellen O. Tackett

Chapter 7

#8.00 Application to Employ Karl T. Anderson CPA, Inc. as Accountants for the Estate EH
Docket 61

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John E. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Joint Debtor(s):
Ellen O. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Movant(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
11:00 AM
6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif and Zobia Asif

Chapter 7

#9.00 Motion for extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge EH
Docket 138

Tentative Ruling:
01/10/2018
BACKGROUND
On May 8, 2017, Malik and Zobia Asif (collectively, the "Debtors") filed for chapter 11 relief. On June 23, 2017, based on representations and the record made by creditors at a Case Management Conference related to the status of the Debtors’ Baja Fresh franchises, the Court converted the case to a case under chapter 7.

On November 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File a Complaint Objecting to Discharge ("Motion"). In support of the Motion, the UST asserts that based on the Debtors’ request for additional time to produce the documents necessary to the UST’s evaluation of whether grounds exist to seek denial of discharge, a 60-day extension of the discharge and dismissal deadline is warranted.

Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 4004 and 1017, Trustee seeks to extend the deadline for Trustee and U.S. Trustee to file a complaint objecting to Debtor’s discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727 and the deadline to seek dismissal under § 707 , for an additional 60 days to January 25, 2018.

Under FRBP 4004(a) and 1017(e), on a motion of any party in interest, the court may for cause extend the time to object to discharge or to seek dismissal. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4004, 1017.

As a matter of practice what constitutes "cause" rests within the discretion of
11:00 AM
CONT...

Malik Muhammad Asif and Zobia Asif

Chapter 7
the bankruptcy court. See In re James, 187 B.R. 395, 397 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1995). Also, Courts are generally unified in the view that the term "for cause" should receive a liberal construction. Id. Notwithstanding that fact, however, a creditor must exhibit some minimum degree of due diligence prior to seeking such an extension, and the Court should not allow the motion to serve as license for a baseless "fishing expedition." Id; See also In re Leary, 185 B.R. 405, 406 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1995). To establish cause movant must (1) show that he had, with reasonable diligence, attempted to investigate the facts and circumstances, and (2) offer a reasonable explanation of why that investigation could not be completed within the allotted time. See Bomarito, 448 B.R. at 251.

The UST has presented evidence that they sought financial records of the Debtors and their entities on November 8, 2017. The UST asserts that they are informed and believe that the Debtors require additional time to produce the documents. The UST has further indicated that after meeting and conferring with Debtors’ counsel, the Debtors indicated that they were agreeable to the extension.

TENTATIVE RULING
Accordingly, based on the record provided by the UST and the failure of the Debtors to file opposition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the relief requested and provide the UST an extension for the filing of a complaint under § 727, and/or for the filing of a motion to dismiss under § 707, to January 25, 2018.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to file an order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Zobia Asif Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Malik Muhammad Asif and Zobia Asif

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Thomas H Casey
11:00 AM
6:17-10724

Bausman and Company Incorporated

Chapter 7

#10.00 Application Second Interim (6/27/17-9/27/17) and Final Application of Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP for Allowance and Payment of Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses as General Dip Counsel

EH

Docket 146
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/31/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
William A Smelko
Movant(s):
Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
William A Smelko
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Best Best & Krieger Caroline Djang
11:00 AM
6:16-20927

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7

#11.00 Motion by Chapter 7 Trustee for Order: 1) Authorizing Sale of Real Property of the Estate Free and Clear of all Liens, Interests, Claims and Encumbrances to Attach to Proceeds; 2) Expunging Lis Pendens; 3) Approving Overbid Procedures; 4) Determining that Buyer is Entitled to 11 U.S.C. § 363(m) Protection; and 5) Waiving the 14 Day Stay Under Rule 6004

EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
01/10/2018
BACKGROUND
On December 14, 2016, Mee Soon Kim ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. Larry Simons is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate are certain real property assets located at 10076 Orchard Street ("Orchard Property") and 18562 Valley Blvd in Bloomington, CA (the "Valley Property") (collectively, the "Properties").

On December 19, 2017, the Trustee filed his Motion by Chapter 7 Trustee for Order: (1) Authorizing Sale of Real Property of the Estate Free and Clear of all Liens, Interests, Claims and Encumbrances to Attach to Proceeds; (2) Expunging Lis Pendens; (3) Approving Overbid Procedures; (4) Determining that Buyer is Entitled to 11 U.S.C. § 363(m) Protection; and (5) Waiving the 14 Day Stay Under Rule 6004 (the "Motion").

Service of the Motion was proper

DISCUSSION
Sale of Estate Property Pursuant to Section 363(b)

The trustee, after notice and a hearing, may sell property of the estate. 11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1); see also Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub, 471 U.S. 343, 352 (1985). The sale must be in the best interests of the estate and the price must be
11:00 AM
CONT...

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7
fair and reasonable. In re Canyon Partnership, 55 B.R. 520 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1985);
see also In re Wilde Horse Enterprises, Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991)(sale must have fair/reasonable price, accurate/reasonable notice to creditors and sale made in good faith). The trustee must articulate some "business justification" for selling estate property out of the "ordinary course of business" before the court may approve the transaction. In re Lionel Corp., 722 F.2d 1063, 1071 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Ernst Home Ctr., Inc., 209 B.R. 974, 979 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1997). Objections to sale that are based on inadequacy of price are often resolved the court ordering an auction, which may occur in open court. Simantrob v. Claims Prosecutor, LLC (In re Lahijani), 325 B.R. 282, 287 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 6004(f).1

In support of the proposed sale to Chai Choi ("Buyer"), the Trustee sets forth the following figures and analysis:

Sale Price …
$655,000
Tax encumbrances (estimated) …
$46,268.52
Unpaid postpetition property insurance fees …
$2,033.30

Estimated Broker’s commission … $39,300

Net Equity for the Estate (minus closing costs): $567,398.18

Based on these figures, the Trustee’s estimate of net proceeds after cost of sale in excess of $550,000 appears reasonable. Thus, the Trustee’s business justification for the sale warrants granting of the Motion.
1. the affected interest is a lien and the sale price is greater than total value of all
11:00 AM
CONT...

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7
liens on the property; (4) the affected interest is a bona fide dispute; or (5) the third party whose interest will be affected could be compelled to accept a money satisfaction of the interest. 11 U.S.C. § 363(f)(1)-(5).

The Trustee proposes to sell the Property free and clear of the interest of Jabro who obtained a lis pendens prepetition based on state court litigation against the Debtor. The Trustee asserts that the state court litigation has now been dismissed and thus requests that this Court expunge the lis pendens, or alternatively, that the Court authorize the sale free and clear of the Jabro Lis Pendens. The Court is not persuaded that the Notice of Motion and Motion sufficiently provided notice to Jabro of the possibility that his Lis Pendens could be expunged if he failed to file opposition to the Motion. Thus, by reason of due process, the Court is disinclined to expunge the Jabro Lis Pendens, notwithstanding the dismissal of the underlying state court litigation.
However, the Court finds that the Trustee has provided sufficient evidence to sell free and clear of the Jabro Lis Pendens under § 363(f)(4) because the evidence indicates that should Mr. Jabro attempt to assert a secured claim against the Properties, such claim would be the subject of a bona fide dispute based on the dismissal of his state court action. On this basis, the Court is inclined to grant the sale of the Properties free and clear of the Jabro Lis Pendens, with the Jabro Lis Pendens to attach to the proceeds to the same extent, validity and priority.

d) Purchaser in "Good Faith" Pursuant to Section 363(m)
Section 363(m) provides that "[t]he reversal or modification on appeal of an authorization under subsection (b) or (c) of this section of a sale or lease of property does not affect the validity of a sale or lease under such authorization to an entity that purchased or leased such property in good faith…." 11 U.S.C. § 363(m).

The Trustee has indicated in his declaration that the Buyer had a pre-existing agreement with Tae Kim (the prepetition transferee whose interests in the Properties have been avoided by the Trustee). However, the Trustee has also indicated that the he had no relationship to the Buyer and that the Trustee did not propose a sale to the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7
Buyer at the same price and instead had the Properties marketed at a higher price which the Buyer was willing to meet. However, the Court requires a declaration of the Buyer to qualify for § 363(m) protection.

TENTATIVE RULING
For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as follows:
1. Authorizing the sale of the Property under § 363(b) to the Buyer or to a successful overbidder at the hearing in accordance with the terms of the Purchase Agreement;
2. Approving the sale free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances and authorizing the Trustee to pay tax liens, costs of sale and other expenses directly from the sale proceeds, including escrow fees, real estate commissions, and TRG insurance fees as set forth in the Motion;
3. Providing that the Trustee is authorized to execute and deliver any documents necessary to effectuate the proposed sale;
4. Authorizing the sale on an AS-IS, WHERE-IS basis, without warranties or representations;
5. Finding that notice was proper and sufficient;
6. Approving the overbid procedures; and
7. Waiving the fourteen day stay under FRBP 6004(h).
  
  Finally, the Court shall also provisionally GRANT the request for a § 363(m) finding on the condition that a declaration of the Buyer be submitted prior to lodgment of the order on the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mee Soon Kim Represented By Minh Duy Nguyen
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Mee Soon Kim
  
  Chapter 7
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By David Seror Michael W Davis
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By David Seror Michael W Davis
  2:00 PM
  6:13-30477
  
  Master Design Inc
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01370 Speier v. Test-Rite Products Corp. et al
  
  #12.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Steven M Speier against Test-Rite Products Corp., Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Ltd., Test-Rite International Co. Ltd., Judy Lee, Chester Lee, Christina Ma. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code3
  § 3439.04(a)(1) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (2) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (3) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05 and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (4) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (5) Conversion; (6) Unlawful Payment of Dividends; (7) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Officer; (8) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Controlling Shareholder; and (9) Declaratory Relief as to Alter Ego Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 3/2/16, 4/6/16, 4/27/16, 6/29/16, 7/20/16, 8/3/16, 9/28/16, 11/9/16, 3/29/17, 8/2/17, 11/8/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/14/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
Defendant(s):
Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Master Design Inc

Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler

Chapter 7
Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Represented By
Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig
Test-Rite International Co. Ltd. Represented By Julie A Garcia Aaron S Craig Joon M Khang John Y Kim Brian Wheeler
Chester Lee Represented By
Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
Christina Ma Represented By
Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
Test-Rite International (US) Co. Ltd. Represented By
Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia
2:00 PM
CONT...

Master Design Inc

John Y Kim Aaron S Craig

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
2:00 PM
6:14-12990

Garrick Craig Smedman

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01121 Smedman et al v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01121. Complaint by Craig Smedman against STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION. (Fee Not Required $350.00). Joint Plaintiff Veronica Lee Wilkins Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other)) (Evans, Neil)

From: 8/30/17, 9/27/17 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Garrick Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
Defendant(s):
STATE BOARD OF Pro Se
California Department of Tax and Represented By
Matthew C. Heyn
Joint Debtor(s):
Veronica Lee Wilkins Represented By Neil C Evans
Plaintiff(s):
Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
Veronica Lee Wilkins Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Garrick Craig Smedman

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01197 Itria Ventures, LLC v. Asif et al

#14.00 CONT Status Conf Re: Adversary case 6:17-ap-01197. Complaint by Itria Ventures, LLC against Malik Muhammad Asif, Zobia Asif. Fee Amount $350 Complaint Objecting To Dischargeability of Debt Nature of Suit: (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud))

CONT: 11/15/17, 12/6/17

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By David T Egli
Zobia Asif Represented By
David T Egli
Joint Debtor(s):
Zobia Asif Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Malik Muhammad Asif

Thomas H Casey

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:17-10032

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01066 Gumbs et al v. Davis, Jr et al

#15.00 Motion for Default Judgment against Richard Earl Davis Jr.

Also #16 EH
Docket 19
Tentative Ruling:
01/10/2018

TENTATIVE RULING

At the hearing on the Plaintiff’s prior Motion for Default Judgment, the Court’s tentative ruling provided, in pertinent part, as follows:

Plaintiff seeks default judgment be entered against Defendant Richard Earl Davis, Jr. (the "Debtor"). Service of the Motion AND of the Summons and Complaint were all effectuated on the Debtor at "2280 Market Street #220 in Riverside, CA". However, the Debtor’s bankruptcy petition indicates his place of residence as "9325 Sunridge Drive in Riverside, CA 92508".

The Court’s tentative ruling is to DENY the Motion without prejudice. Movant to lodge an order denying the motion and requesting that the Court issue an alias summons for Movant to serve the summons and complaint at the Debtor’s residence as indicated on the bankruptcy
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Earl Davis, Jr
petition. Deadlines shall be reset accordingly.

Chapter 7

An alias summons was issued and the Plaintiff filed a proof of service indicating that the Alias Summons was executed. The instant Motion for Default Judgment was then filed on December 7, 2017. Both Proofs of Service indicate that the Debtor was now served at "9324 Sunridge Drive in Riverside, CA" Again, in a situation where the Debtor/Defendant is nonresponsive, the Plaintiff’s ongoing failure to serve the Debtor at the correct address creates a due process issue which prevents this case from moving forward.

Separately, although the Debtor has disclosed the debt owed to Plaintiff in the amount of $150,000 in his Schedule E/F pursuant to a State Court Judgment, the Court notes that the Plaintiff has failed to attach the underlying state court documents (e.g. the state court complaint and judgment) which are essential to final ruling on the Complaint. Additionally, the Plaintiff has not included points and authorities to indicate whether the motion is made under collateral estoppel principles.

The Court’s tentative ruling is to DENY the Motion without prejudice. Movant to lodge an order denying the motion and requesting that the Court issue an alias summons for Movant to serve the summons and complaint at the Debtor’s residence as indicated on the bankruptcy petition. Deadlines shall be reset accordingly.

Ongoing failure to correctly serve documents on the Debtor correctly may result in sanctions.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
2:00 PM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7
Richard Earl Davis Jr Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Richard Earl Davis Jr Pro Se
Two6 Sports Management Pro Se
Movant(s):
Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris
Plaintiff(s):
Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris
Kandis Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-10032

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01066 Gumbs et al v. Davis, Jr et al

#16.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01066. Complaint by Angelo M Gumbs , Kandis Gumbs against Richard Earl Davis Jr, Two6 Sports Management . false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud))

From: 8/30/17, 11/1/17 Also #15
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Earl Davis Jr Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Richard Earl Davis Jr Pro Se
Two6 Sports Management Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris
Kandis Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#17.00 Order to show cause why defendant's counsel should not be sanctioned Also #18
EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
Jessica De Anda Leon
Defendant(s):
Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#18.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint to Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer

From: 9/7/16, 11/9/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/27/17, 11/29/17

Also #17 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
Jessica De Anda Leon
Defendant(s):
Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
6:17-13012

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbbash et al

#19.00 Motion Of Plaintiffs For Order Granting Leave To Late File Amended Adversary Complaint

EH

Docket 28
Tentative Ruling: 01/10/2018

BACKGROUND
On April 11, 2017, Issa & Amal Musharbash ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 17, 2017, Phillip & Violette Musharbash ("Plaintiffs") filed a non- dischargeability complaint against Debtors. On August 16, 2017, Debtors filed an answer. On September 20, 2017, an initial status conference was held.

On September 29, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint (the "Amendment Motion"). The Court granted the Amendment Motion and provided the Plaintiffs with a deadline of November 2, 2017, to file their amended complaint. The Plaintiffs in their declaration indicate that they inadvertently believed they had already filed the amended complaint alongside their Amendment Motion.

DISCUSSION
Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(a)(1)-(2) states:
Here, Debtors’ answer was filed on August 12, 2017, and, therefore, the standard of Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(a)(2) applies.

As is noted by Plaintiffs, "leave to amend should be granted unless amendment would cause prejudice to the opposing party, is sought in bad faith, is futile, or creates undue delay." Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992).

Here, the Court previously determined that the Plaintiffs’ request for amendment was justified. However, Plaintiffs failed to file their amended complaint by the Court ordered deadline of November 2, 2017. Now Plaintiff’s request this Court’s authority to permit their late filing of the amended complaint. Defendants, though properly served, have failed to file opposition and the Court does not perceive legal prejudice from permitting the late amendment, which amended complaint shall be filed by January 26, 2018. For these reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request to permit the late-filing of the amended complaint with the condition that should Defendants appear at the hearing on 1/10/2018, they shall be reimbursed for costs of travel and lost wages, if any, for attendance at the hearings set for 1/10/2018.

TENTATIVE RULING
The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion as set forth herein.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Debtor(s):

Issa M Musharbash

Party Information

Chapter 7
Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Defendant(s):
Issa M Musharbbash Pro Se
Amal Musharbbash Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
12:30 PM
6:12-18311

Linda Gail Majors

Chapter 13

#1.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 3 by Claimant New Penn Financial d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing

EH

Docket 109
Tentative Ruling:
1/11/18

Background:

On April 3, 2012, Linda Majors ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On July 2, 2012, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. On October 12, 2017, Debtor received a discharge.

On July 6, 2012, Chase Records Center filed a proof of claim for a debt in the amount of $93,323.90, secured by Debtor’s principal residence ("Claim 3"). Claim 3 included
$13,601.58 in pre-petition arrears. Claim 3 has been transferred four times since the claim was filed, and is currently held by New Penn Financial, LLC ("Creditor’).

On November 30, 2017, Trustee filed an objection to Claim 3. Trustee requests that Claim 3 be decreased by $13,485.26, and that Creditor return $8,149.13 to the estate.

The factual background for Trustee’s request is the following. On November 2, 2015,
12:30 PM
CONT...

Linda Gail Majors

Chapter 13
Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. ("Residential"), the holder of Claim 3 at the time, filed a motion for court consent to enter into a loan modification agreement. On November 10, 2015, Trustee filed comments indicating conditional approval of the request. Among the conditions enumerated by Trustee was that Residential would amend Claim 3 within thirty days of a final loan modification. On December 21, 2015, Debtor, who was not the movant, filed a declaration of non-opposition for the motion for court consent to enter into a loan modification agreement. No order, however, was obtained.

Nevertheless, pursuant to Trustee’s claim objection, it appears that the parties acted as if they had a properly consummated loan modification. Specifically, Trustee asserts that on October 12, 2017, Creditor acknowledged the loan modification and inquired whether any funds needed to be returned. Trustee appears to assert that the loan modification would have eliminated all but $116.32 (the pre-petition late charges) of the pre-petition arrears. Trustee states that the effective date of the loan modification was September 1, 2015, and that after that date payments continued to Creditor on the basis of Claim 3, which was never amended. Trustee asserts that overpayments in the amount of $8,149.13 resulted.

Applicable Law:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving
12:30 PM
CONT...

Linda Gail Majors

Chapter 13
rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

Analysis:

Extensive case law supports the proposition that court authorization of a loan modification agreement is not a prerequisite to the agreement’s enforceability, but, instead, such authorization simply provides additionally certainty and clarity to the contracting parties. See, e.g., In re Wofford, 449 B.R. 362, 364 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2011) ("At the same time, there does not appear to be any applicable law or rule that requires judicial approval of the terms of the loan modification itself."); see also Stewart v. Bank of Am., N.A., 201 WL 7475613 (N.D. Cal. 2016); Matter of Moore, 2015 WL 5553534 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2015); In re Smith, 409 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D.N.H.
2009). Here, therefore, the loan modification is not invalid solely on the basis that the parties did not obtain a court order approving the agreement. Trustee has provided adequate evidence that an enforceable loan modification agreement was entered into by Debtor and Creditor.
12:30 PM
CONT...

Linda Gail Majors

Chapter 13
Additionally, Trustee has provided adequate evidence that the loan modification resulted in a reduction of the pre-petition arrears from $13,601.58 to $116.32.
Trustee’s additional request, however, raises procedural concerns. As is acknowledged by Trustee in his e-mail correspondence with Debtor’s attorney in Exhibit J, Trustee’s request for turnover of funds by a non-debtor party typically requires an adversary proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 7001(1). While the requirement of an adversary proceeding may be waived in certain circumstances, those circumstances are not present here. Specifically, Creditor is a large, national company and has not filed any opposition to the instant motion. Under these circumstances, the Court cannot deem the Creditor to have waived the due process protections it is entitled to under Rule 7001.

Tentative Ruling

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection to the extent it seeks a reduction of the pre-petition arrears of Claim 3 in the amount of $13,601.58. The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection to the extent it seeks relief which falls under the protections of Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 7001(1).

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Linda Gail Majors Represented By Anthony Wilaras
Movant(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
12:30 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Linda Gail Majors

Chapter 13
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
12:30 PM
6:12-21385

John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers

Chapter 13

#2.00 CONT Motion for Disgorgement of Attorneys' Fees From: 12/14/17
Also #3 EH
Docket 123

Tentative Ruling: 12/14/2017 BACKGROUND
On May 8, 2012, John and Nancy Elbers (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Amrane Cohen is the duly appointed chapter 13 trustee ("Trustee"). At the inception of the case, the Debtors were represented by Samuel Kelsall ("Kelsall"). On behalf of the Debtors, Kelsall filed the petition and took various actions in the case on behalf of the Debtors, including prosecution of a motion to avoid lien through an evidentiary hearing. The Trustee’s records indicate that Kelsall incurred and received $12,000 in total for his bankruptcy services on behalf of the Debtors.

On November 14, 2017, the Debtors filed a Motion For Sanctions/Disgorgement of Attorneys' Fees re Samuel Kelsall (the "Motion"). The Motion asserts that:
1. Kelsall received $1,460 from Hyatt Legal Plans ("Hyatt") on behalf of the Debtors, and that check is dated August 17, 2012 (the "Hyatt Payment");
2. Kelsall received an additional $40 from Hyatt which Kelsall asserts was for a consultation;
3. Kelsall filed a Disclosure of Compensation of Attorney for Debtor on May 8, 2012;
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers
4. Kelsall did not file a supplement to his disclosed compensation at any time during the pendency of the case; and
5. At a hearing on August 17, 2012, on a Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss, the Debtors represented to the Trustee that Kelsall had received an additional
  $1,500 from Hyatt which Kelsall had failed to disclose.
  Based on the alleged nondisclosure by Kelsall of the Hyatt Payment, the
  
  Chapter 13
  Trustee seeks an order requiring him to disgorge $13,500 (or the total amount paid by the Debtors for the bankruptcy-related services). The requested disgorgement is sought under FRBP 2016(b) which requires disclosure of compensation and supplemental statements regarding amounts paid but not previously disclosed.
  
  On December 5, 2017, Kelsall filed opposition to the Motion ("Opposition"). As regards the merits of the Motion, Kelsall asserts that the Trustee’s evidence of the Hyatt Payment is deficient in that the records produced by Hyatt are not accompanied by a record or other documentation indicating which case the payment was made on (i.e. does not identify the Debtors or their case). Kelsall further argues that the numbers do not add up. In support, he asserts that the fee for a couples’ bankruptcy filing would be a total of $1,500, not including the additional $40 for the consultation. Thus, the check for $1,460 plus the $40 consultation fee cannot have been for payment towards the Debtors’ case because the actual amount owed by Hyatt on behalf of the Debtors would have been $1,500 plus $40.
  
  In reply to Kelsall, the Trustee notes that Kelsall has indicated he cannot identify on whose behalf the Hyatt Payment was made. The Trustee argues that Kelsall’s response further compounds the problems identified in the Motion because it demonstrates Kelsall’s failure to properly account for funds received by his firm on behalf of his clients as required by the California Rules of Professional Conduct.
  
  DISCUSSION
  There is no legal dispute regarding the applicability of FRBP 2016. Instead, the instant matter is solely a factual dispute regarding whether or not Kelsall received the Hyatt Payment on behalf of the Debtors which would have triggered his duty to
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers
  
  Chapter 13
  disclose compensation. Kelsall disputes that he received funds from Hyatt on behalf of the Debtors. Although Kelsall is correct that the check proffered by the Trustee does not identify the Debtors on the check, he does not provide evidence to indicate that the check was definitively received by his office on behalf of other clients.
  Moreover, the evidence indicates that the check was issued in 2012. Thus, several years have lapsed in the interim and the Trustee correctly points out that during that time it was Kelsall’s duty to properly account for the Hyatt Payment. Finally, the letter from Hyatt dated April 26, 2017 provides evidence the funds were paid to Kelsall (and Kelsall has failed to object to this evidence). As such, Kelsall failed in his duty to disclose all compensation received.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined GRANT the Motion and order disgorgement.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John Raymond Elbers Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Nancy Ann Elbers Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:30 PM
  6:12-21385
  
  John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Objection to Notice of Intent to File Trustee's Final Report and Obtain Discharge of the Trustee
  
  From:12/14/17 Also #2
  EH
  
  Docket 118
  
  Tentative Ruling: 12/14/2017 BACKGROUND
  As a threshold matter, the Court incorporates and takes judicial notice of the pleadings filed in connection with Docket No. 123, the Trustee’s Motion for Disgorgement, and of the factual allegations made therein as they may regard the instant matter.
  
  On September 26, 2017, the Trustee filed his Notice of Intent to File Trustee’s Final Report and Account (the "Notice"). On October 25, 2017, the Debtors filed their objection to the Notice ("Objection"). The Debtors’ objection specifically argues that
  1. Kelsall’s fees received in the case exceeded reasonable and customary fees and should not have been awarded, (2) Debtors did not receive service by mail (purportedly of the Fee Applications) filed by Kelsall and therefore did not have an opportunity to object, and (3) that Kelsall failed to disclose the $1,500 received from Hyatt on behalf of the Debtors. Based on these allegations, the Debtors seek disgorgement.
DISCUSSION
As a threshold matter, the Debtors’ Objection is not properly before the Court because the Debtors are seeking affirmative relief from Mr. Kelsall in an objection to
12:30 PM
CONT...

John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers

Chapter 13
the Trustee’s Notice of Intent to File his Final Report. However, given that Mr. Kelsall filed a response and that the Debtors are in pro per, the Court will briefly address the arguments made.

The mailbox rule provides that the proper and timely mailing of a document raises a rebuttable presumption that the document has been received by the addressee in the usual time. It is a settled feature of the federal common law. Hagner v. United States, 285 U.S. 427, 430, 52 S.Ct. 417, 76 L.Ed. 861 (1932); Rosenthal v. Walker,
111 U.S. 185, 193, 4 S.Ct. 382, 28 L.Ed. 395 (1884); Lewis v. United States, 144 F.3d
1220, 1222 (9th Cir.1998).

Because the common law mailbox rule operates as a rebuttable presumption, the factfinder must determine whether Mr. Kelsall has presented sufficient evidence of mailing to invoke the presumption of receipt and, if so, whether the Debtors have presented sufficient evidence of non-receipt to rebut the presumption. Schikore v.
BankAmerica Supplemental Ret. Plan, 269 F.3d 956, 963 (9th Cir. 2001).

Here, Mr. Kelsall has provided Ex. 10, the Application for Supplemental Fees, Ex. 12, the Notice of Hearing on Application for Payment of Interim or Final Fees, both with corresponding proofs of service. Both documents are signed under penalty of perjury and contain attached mailing lists which indicate that the Debtors were served at their residence. In contrast, the Debtors have provided no evidence to controvert the proofs of service. As such, the Court must find that the Debtors have failed to rebut Mr. Kelsall’s evidence of mailing and therefore that the Debtors are presumed to have received Mr. Kelsall’s applications for fees.

Next, having found that the Debtors received proper notice and service of Mr.
Kelsall’s fee applications, the Debtors cannot now object to Mr. Kelsall’s fees. The time to object to the reasonableness of fees was when they received notice of the applications. As such, the Court need not address whether Mr. Kelsall’s fees were reasonable.
12:30 PM
CONT...

John Raymond Elbers and Nancy Ann Elbers

Chapter 13
Finally, the Debtors have raised the issue of Mr. Kelsall’s nondisclosure of the
$1,500 in payments from Hyatt. This matter is being concurrently addressed by the Trustee’s Motion for Disgorgement. As such, there is no need to address the matter further on this Objection.

TENTATIVE RULING
Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Debtor’s Objection as not properly brought before the Court, and as an alternate grounds, on the merits for the reasons stated herein.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
John Raymond Elbers Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Nancy Ann Elbers Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
12:31 PM
6:12-21687

Larry J Neilsen and Brenda J Neilsen

Chapter 13

#4.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms EH
Docket 98
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/22/17
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Larry J Neilsen Represented By
Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
Sundee M Teeple
Joint Debtor(s):
Brenda J Neilsen Represented By
Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:12-27553

Mary Black-Williams

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms

From: 11/9/17 EH

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mary Black-Williams Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:12-29624

Thomas D Felch and Michelle M Felch

Chapter 13

#6.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case for failure to complete the plan within its terms EH
Docket 143

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Thomas D Felch Represented By Michael F Chekian
Joint Debtor(s):
Michelle M Felch Represented By Michael F Chekian
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Amrane (SA) Cohen (TR)
12:31 PM
6:12-36765

Karen Patricia Boyd

Chapter 13

#7.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Due to Material Default EH
Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Karen Patricia Boyd Represented By David Lozano
Movant(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
12:32 PM
6:17-19628

Alejandro Salinas, Jr.

Chapter 13

#8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Alejandro Salinas Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:32 PM
6:17-18388

Gregorio Orozco Sotelo

Chapter 13

#9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/16/17, 12/14/17, 1/4/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gregorio Orozco Sotelo Represented By
Lisa F Collins-Williams
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:32 PM
6:13-28940

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

#10.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
Docket 91
Tentative Ruling: 1/11/18
BACKGROUND

On November 21,2013, Jose & Hiliana Castellanos ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On December 17, 2013, Debtors’ case was converted to Chapter
13. On March 6, 2014, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On July 5, 2017, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for failure to submit tax returns to the Trustee. No opposition was filed by Debtors and, after a continuance, the motion was granted and the case was dismissed on November 13, 2017.

On November 28, 2017, Debtors filed a motion to vacate dismissal. Debtors’ primary explanation why the tax returns were not tendered is that: (1) a filing extension to October 15th; and (2) that Debtors made their final plan payment on November 3, 2017. On November 29, 2017, Trustee filed comments indicating conditional approval of the motion, assuming that the tax returns were sent to the Trustee and the motion was served properly.

DISCUSSION
12:32 PM
CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 9024, incorporating Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(1), provides for relief from an order for, among other things, "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." Debtors state that they asked their accountant to mail a copy of the tax returns to the Trustee, and that, at the time of the dismissal of their case, they had finished making plan payments.

Given the conditional approval of the Trustee and the evidence submitted by Debtor, the Court finds that the requested relief is proper assuming that the Trustee’s conditions have been satisfied..

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion conditioned on the Trustee’s confirmation that he has received the applicable tax returns.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Joint Debtor(s):
Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Movant(s):
Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
12:32 PM
CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos
Mark E Brenner

Chapter 13
Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:32 PM
6:14-21228

Roy Kenneth Scott and Tashiea Scott

Chapter 13

#11.00 Motion to Dismiss or Convert to Chapter 13 EH
Docket 93

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Roy Kenneth Scott Represented By Sunita N Sood
Joint Debtor(s):
Tashiea Scott Represented By
Sunita N Sood
Movant(s):
California Franchise Tax Board Represented By Brian D Wesley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:32 PM
6:17-19377

Sheryl Welsh

Chapter 13

#12.00 Show Cause Hearing Why Fees Should Not Be Disgorged EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sheryl Welsh Represented By
Hayk Grigoryan
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:16-12692

Arturo Villagrana

Chapter 13

#13.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Arturo Villagrana Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:16-13388

James Leonard Blow, Jr. and Amanda Joyce Atkinson-Blow

Chapter 13

#14.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/21/17
EH

Docket 66
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
1/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Leonard Blow Jr. Represented By Jonathan D Doan
Joint Debtor(s):
Amanda Joyce Atkinson-Blow Represented By Jonathan D Doan
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:16-20329

Gabriel Cruz

Chapter 13

#15.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Tax Returns/Refunds) From: 7/24/17, 8/31/17, 10/5/17, 11/30/17, 12/14/17, 12/21/17
Also #16 EH
Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gabriel Cruz Represented By
Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:16-20329

Gabriel Cruz

Chapter 13

#16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) Also #15
EH

Docket 40
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
1/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gabriel Cruz Represented By
Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:17-13809

Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda

Chapter 13

#17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 22
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/27/17
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Joint Debtor(s):
Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:17-14187

Andre J Booker and Carrie L Booker

Chapter 13

#18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Andre J Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Carrie L Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:17-14588

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng

Chapter 13

#19.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/21/17
EH

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:33 PM
6:17-16923

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13

#20.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
1:00 PM
6:17-18957

Rodolfo Zendejas

Chapter 7

#21.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12234 Avenue C, Yucaipa, CA 92399

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 1/9/18 EH
Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). DENY request under § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rodolfo Zendejas Represented By Robert R Tilton
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
Kelly M Raftery
1:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Rodolfo Zendejas

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

Wednesday, January 17, 2018
Hearing Room
303

9:30 AM
6:13-25725

Bernadette Chapman

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:17-01046 Chapman v. U.S. Bank, NA et al

#1.00 Settlement Conference (MJ Case) EH
Docket 0

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Bernadette Chapman Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
U.S. Bank, NA Represented By
Sonia Plesset Edwards Gwen H Ribar
Wenjing Dai Represented By
Robert O Marshall
Plaintiff(s):
Bernadette Chapman Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
10:00 AM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#1.00 CONT Motion For Order Restricting Debtor's Use Of Corporate Funds From: 8/23/17, 10/3/17, 10/31/17, 11/28/17
Also #2 - #4 EH
Docket 6
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/11/17
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
Movant(s):
Mark Hayek Represented By
Erwin J Shustak
10:00 AM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#2.00 CONT Motion for Relief from Stay

MOVANT: CHRIS RISENMAY; JAMES BRAY; NICK CUNNINGTON; DAVID THATCHER; CLARK PENNEY; SHATTUCK LAMM; STEPHEN BIESINGER; MARK THATCHER; BRANDT KUHN; MICHELE SARNA; MARK HAYEK, AND MIKE MCCONNELL

From: 9/26/17, 10/3/17, 10/31/17, 11/28/17

Also #1 - #4 EH
Docket 27
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/11/17
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
Movant(s):
Mark Hayek Represented By
Erwin J Shustak
10:00 AM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#3.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Chapter 7 Involuntary Petition Against a Non- Individual

From: 8/16/17, 8/23/17, 10/3/17, 10/31/17, Advanced From: 11/28/17, 11/14/17 Also #1 - #4
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 11 ON 1/5/18
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
10:00 AM
6:17-15816
Integrated Wealth Management Inc
Chapter 11

#4.00 CONT Motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: St Jude Heritage Medical Group
v. Integrated Wealth Management et. al. docket case no. 8:17-cv-00647-JVS MOVANT: ST JUDE HERITAGE MEDICAL GROUP
From: 11/14/17 Also #1 - #3 EH
Docket 66
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
Movant(s):
St. Jude Heritage Medical Group, Represented By
Elaine Nguyen Daniel J Weintraub James R Selth
11:00 AM
6:14-18549

Matthew Joseph Pautz and Alice Louise Pautz

Chapter 7

#5.00 CONT Order to Show Cause re Bodily Detention Order From: 8/15/17, 9/18/17, 10/18/17, 11/13/17, 11/27/17
EH

Docket 135
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Matthew Joseph Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Joint Debtor(s):
Alice Louise Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe Samuel J Romero
12:30 PM
6:16-16909
Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
Chapter 13
#6.00 Application for Compensation with proof of service for Dana Travis, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $720.00, Expenses: $.
EH
Docket 126
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Movant(s):
Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:30 PM
6:17-19400

Beverley June Marshall

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/21/17
EH

Docket 0

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Beverley June Marshall Represented By Arthur H Lampel
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:13-13746

Ronald Andrew Lopez and Lisa Darlene Lopez

Chapter 13

#8.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 156
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ronald Andrew Lopez Represented By David Lozano
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Darlene Lopez Represented By David Lozano
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:14-23150
Vivian Munson
Chapter 13
#9.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 12/21/17, 1/4/18
EH
Docket 180
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
Movant(s):
Rod (MH) Danielson (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:15-15137

David E. Laliberte and Lori L. Laliberte

Chapter 13

#10.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 39
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/14/17
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David E. Laliberte Represented By Bernard J Gartland Timothy S Huyck
Joint Debtor(s):
Lori L. Laliberte Represented By Bernard J Gartland Timothy S Huyck
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:15-16972
Joe Martinez, Jr. and Sandra Lynette Martinez
Chapter 13
#11.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 40
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joe Martinez Jr. Represented By David Lozano
Joint Debtor(s):
Sandra Lynette Martinez Represented By David Lozano
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:15-21412
Adrienne J Garcelli and Paul Garcelli
Chapter 13
#12.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/4/18
EH
Docket 105
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Adrienne J Garcelli Represented By Andy C Warshaw
Joint Debtor(s):
Paul Garcelli Represented By
Andy C Warshaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:16-12191

Valicia LaShawn Fennell

Chapter 13

#13.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 56
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Valicia LaShawn Fennell Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:16-21181

Luis Fernando Buenrostro

Chapter 13

#14.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 46
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Luis Fernando Buenrostro Represented By Sunita N Sood
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:17-10742
William Fuentes and Martha C Orozco de Fuentes
Chapter 13
#15.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/9/17, 12/14/17
EH
Docket 28
Party Information
Debtor(s):
William Fuentes Represented By Marlin Branstetter
Joint Debtor(s):
Martha C Orozco de Fuentes Represented By Marlin Branstetter
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
12:31 PM
6:17-14619
Candice Maria Borrego
Chapter 13
#16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 23
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Candice Maria Borrego Represented By Andy C Warshaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-11053
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
Chapter 11

#1.00 CONT Disclosure Statement hearing
HOLDING DATE

From: 7/25/17, 8/22/17, 10/18/17, 12/4/17

Also #2 & #3 EH
Docket 88
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
10:00 AM
6:17-11053
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
Chapter 11

#2.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 7/25/17, 8/22/17, 10/18/17, 12/4/17

Also #1 & #3 EH
Docket 6
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
10:00 AM
6:17-11053
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
Chapter 11

#3.00 CONT Evidentiary Hearing re Motion for Valuation of Security Interest in Real Property

From: 10/18/17, 12/4/17 Also #1 & #2
EH

Docket 80
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
Movant(s):
Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
10:00 AM
6:12-27192
Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
Chapter 13

#1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28114 Championship Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92555

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 11/28/17 EH
Docket 100

Tentative Ruling:
11/28/2017
Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Debtors have provided evidence that regular payments were made between May 2016 and November 1, 2017 (with the exception of the August 2016 and December 2016 payments for which Debtors are seeking evidence). Exhibit 5, which is the Movant’s summary of post-petition payments reflects numerous debits for 2016 payments which appears to corroborate Debtors’ assertion that refunds were made due to a mix-up in payments being made by the Trustee’s office.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Achilles A. LaSalle Jr. Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
Joint Debtor(s):
Elsie LaSalle Represented By
Lazaro E Fernandez
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle

Chapter 13
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
Armin M Kolenovic
Trustee(s):
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
10:00 AM
6:15-13218

Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz

Chapter 13

#2.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43375 Madison St, Indio, CA 92201

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 11/28/17 EH
Docket 69
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/20/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-13752

Catalina Smith

Chapter 13

#3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 16227 Miller Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336.

MOVANT: US ROF II/BANK NATIONAL ASSOC

EH

Docket 44
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/18 AT 10:00 AM
Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Movant to apprise Court of status of arrears. Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Catalina Smith Represented By Luis G Torres
Movant(s):
U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
Megan E Lees
U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
Megan E Lees Alexander K Lee Jamie D Hanawalt Armin M Kolenovic
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Catalina Smith

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-17947

Mark Andrew Galliano and Elizabeth Ann Galliano

Chapter 13

#4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 CHRYSLER 200, VIN 1C3CCCAB0FN533116

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER INC

EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY alternative request under § 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark Andrew Galliano Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
Joint Debtor(s):
Elizabeth Ann Galliano Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc, dba Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Andrew Galliano and Elizabeth Ann Galliano
Jennifer H Wang

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-13233

Sherry Ann Beardsley

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1041 W 27th St, San Bernardino, CA 92405-3121

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

From: 1/9/18 EH
Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Movant to confirm that arrears have been cured. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sherry Ann Beardsley Represented By Jeffrey D Larkin
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Mark D Estle Bruce E Brown
Beverly Lorraine Evans Dane W Exnowski
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Sherry Ann Beardsley

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-14440

Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino

Chapter 13

#6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15605 Esther St., Chino Hills CA 91709

MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

EH

Docket 50

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Movant to confirm that Debtors have cured arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
Joint Debtor(s):
Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
Movant(s):
The Bank of New York Mellon FKA Represented By
Mark D Estle
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-15216

Charles Bowen Blanton and Heddy Maria Blanton

Chapter 13

#7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Harley-Davidson FLHTCUTG Triglide Ultra Classic; VIN: 1HD1MAL31FB853703

MOVANT: HARLEY-DAVIDSON CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 54

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY alternative request under § 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Bowen Blanton Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Heddy Maria Blanton Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Charles Bowen Blanton and Heddy Maria Blanton

Chapter 13
HARLEY-DAVIDSON CREDIT Represented By
Mark D Estle
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-18295

Andrew Sidney Cunningham and Barbara Renee

Chapter 13

#8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 TOYOTA PRIUS

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 33
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Andrew Sidney Cunningham Represented By
Bryant C MacDonald
Joint Debtor(s):
Barbara Renee Cunningham Represented By
Bryant C MacDonald
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Erica T Loftis
Erin M McCartney Leslie M Klott Mark D Estle
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-20967

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13

#9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2004 Lexus Rx330-v6

MOVANT: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA

EH

Docket 51

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY alternative request under § 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman
Joint Debtor(s):
Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman
Movant(s):
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-10559

David Richard Hernandez

Chapter 7

#10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2731 Duffy Street San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES LLC

EH

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT Movant’s request for confirmation that the stay is no longer in effect as to actions taken against the real property located at 2731 Duffy St., San Bernardino, CA 92407. Specifically, on July 27, 2017, the Chapter 7 Trustee filed a notice of proposed abandonment of property of the estate (and no opposition was filed) and Debtor received a discharge on May 8, 2017. Therefore, pursuant to § 362 (c), the automatic stay is no longer applicable to the abandoned real property. Because the automatic stay is no longer in effect as to the abandoned real property, the remainder of Movant’s requests are DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David Richard Hernandez Represented By William S Tilton
Movant(s):
Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

David Richard Hernandez

Alexander G Meissner

Chapter 7
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-11831

Gregory Dwight Vit

Chapter 13

#11.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 46048 Paseo Gallante, Temecula, CA 92592

MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

From: 11/28/17, 1/9/18 EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
11/28/2017
Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to indicate whether arrears have been cured or alternatively, whether APO agreement has been reached.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gregory Dwight Vit Represented By Christopher J Langley
Movant(s):
Bank Of New York Mellon FKA Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-12758

Luis A Jovel

Chapter 13

#12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1399 Vine St, San Bernardino, CA 92411

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

EH

Docket 38
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Luis A Jovel Represented By
Manfred Schroer
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jennifer C Wong
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-13583

William J Schaefer and Jennifer L. Schaefer

Chapter 13

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 33895 Wagon Train Drive, Wildomar, CA 92595

MOVANT: M&T BANK AS ATTORNEY IN FACT FOR LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

EH

Docket 41
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/18/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
William J Schaefer Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Joint Debtor(s):
Jennifer L. Schaefer Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Movant(s):
M&T Bank as Attorney in Fact for Represented By
Jennifer C Wong
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-14588

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng

Chapter 13

#14.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Toyota Corolla VIN: 5YFBURHE1HP579809

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

From: 1/9/18 EH
Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:
1/9/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the § 1301(a) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15728

Jesus Angel Acosta and Maria Teresa Acosta

Chapter 13

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2007 GMC LIGHT DUTY Sierra 1500
Regular Cab SLE 4WD

MOVANT: CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE

EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY request under § 5 because the motion has not been served on any co-debtor as that term is used in § 1301(a).

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jesus Angel Acosta Represented By
James Geoffrey Beirne
Joint Debtor(s):
Maria Teresa Acosta Represented By
James Geoffrey Beirne
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Jesus Angel Acosta and Maria Teresa Acosta

Chapter 13
Capital One Auto Finance, a Represented By Bret D. Allen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-16257

Maria Armina Policarpio Trinidad

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 45675 Sugarloaf Mountain, Indian Wells CA 92210.

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

EH

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Debtor had a previous Chapter 7 filing dismissed for failure to file information on July 25, 2017. Because of the previous filing, the automatic stay in this case terminated thirty days after the petition date pursuant to § 362(c)(3)(A) absent court order. Debtor did not seek an order continuing the automatic stay and, therefore, the automatic stay terminated on August 26, 2017. Therefore, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request for relief under ¶ 3.

Movant has additionally requested annulment of the automatic stay, which would apply to the period between the petition date and the 30th day after the petition date (when the automatic stay terminated). Movant’s attachment page, captioned "Facts Justifying Annulment Continuation Page," lacks the detail necessary to justify retroactive annulment of the automatic stay. Specifically, it is unclear when Movant learned of the bankruptcy petition, and it is unclear what, if any, actions were taken in violation of the automatic stay. Moreover, the Court notes that Debtor’s creditor matrix lists multiple addresses for Movant. The docket also indicates that Movant’s counsel was served with documents evidencing the bankruptcy filing two days after the petition date, at the latest. Therefore, this request is DENIED without prejudice.
10:00 AM
CONT...

Maria Armina Policarpio Trinidad

Chapter 7
Movant also requests in rem relief under ¶¶ 7 and 11. Movant’s request under ¶ 7 is denied because it is unclear if the writ of possession was obtained in violation of the automatic stay and, therefore, void. Movant’s request under ¶ 11 is denied for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria Armina Policarpio Trinidad Pro Se
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Alexander K Lee Sean C Ferry Kevin A Harris
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-16683

Salvador Caridad Rodriguez

Chapter 13

#17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 29212 Mesa Crest Way, Menifee, CA 92584

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 26
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Salvador Caridad Rodriguez Represented By Carey C Pickford
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association as Represented By
Nancy L Lee Jennifer C Wong
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-16923

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 7

#18.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1156 Sheila Court, Upland, CA 91784-1563

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 12/5/17 EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
12/5/2017

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Debtor to confirm she is current and parties to discuss adequate protection. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-17609

Danny Howard Weeks

Chapter 13

#19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Freightliner Cascadia

MOVANT: MISSION FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

EH

Docket 22

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY request for relief under § 362(d)(2) because it is unclear if the collateral is necessary for an effective reorganization. DENY alternative request under § 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth
Movant(s):
Mission Financial Services Represented By Robert S Lampl
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19943

Denise Renella

Chapter 7

#20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 BMW 3 Series VIN: WBA3C1C5XDF440549

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES INC dba GM FINANCIAL

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY alternative request under § 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Denise Renella Pro Se
Movant(s):
AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous and Bernadette Shenouda

Chapter 7

#21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 12160 Mariposa Road, Victorville, CA 92395

MOVANT: BAYS PROPERTIES, LLC

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY requests under § 3, 7, and 9 for lack of cause shown. DENY alternative request under
§ 12 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous and Bernadette Shenouda

Chapter 7
Bays Properties, LLC Represented By Robert C Thorn
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20434

Michelle Singleton

Chapter 13

#22.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY

MOVANT: MICHELLE SINGLETON

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling: 1/23/2018
The Court will DENY the motion. 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(B) requires that a hearing on a motion to continue the automatic stay be completed within thirty days of the petition date. Movant set the instant hearing thirty-three days after the petition date.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michelle Singleton Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
Michelle Singleton Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20519

Carlos Gutierrez

Chapter 13

#23.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1553 N. Granite Avenue Ontario, CA 91762

MOVANT: CARLOS GUTIERREZ

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, continuing the automatic stay as to all creditors. Specifically, the Court finds that the declaration of Debtor is adequate to overcome the § 362(c)(3)(C) presumption that the case was filed in bad faith.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carlos Gutierrez Represented By Scott Kosner
Movant(s):
Carlos Gutierrez Represented By Scott Kosner
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20535

Antonio Ochoa

Chapter 13

#24.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1860 Chicago Ave, Ste G-20, Riverside CA 92507

MOVANT: JS MCA HUNTER PARK LP

CASE DISMISSED 1/9/18

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
1/23/2018

Service is Improper Opposition: None

Pursuant to Local Rule 4001-1(c)(1)(C), motions for relief from the automatic stay must be served on the debtor. Here, Movant did not serve the motion on Debtor.
Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to February 27, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. for Movant to file and serve the motion and notice of continued hearing and opportunity to object on Debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Antonio Ochoa Represented By Qais Zafari
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Antonio Ochoa

Chapter 13
JS MCA Hunter Park LP Represented By Nicholas Firetag
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#25.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Semi Truck and Trailer

MOVANT: HITACHI CAPITAL AMERICA CORP

Also #26 EH
Docket 60
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/19/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Hitachi Capital America Corp. Represented By Richard A Solomon

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #26.00 Motion to Compel Assumption or Rejection of Defaulted Unexpired Lease of Personal Property; for Provision of Adequate Protection and Maintenance of 11

U.S.C. §365(d)(5) Payments; and for Relief from Stay in the Event of Rejection of Lease (Mroczynski, Randall)

Also #25 EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Trans Lease, Inc. Represented By

Randall P Mroczynski

11:00 AM

6:17-20182

Maisha Tamu Mesa

Chapter 7 #1.00 Motion By United States Trustee To Dismiss Case With A Filing Bar EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

01/24/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 12, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Maisha Mesa (the "Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief.

On December 29, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Dismiss Chapter 7 Case with a Re-Filing Bar (the "Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

Section 707(b)(3) was added to the Bankruptcy Code by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA). In re Siegenberg, 2007 WL 6371956 (2007). Since BAPCPA, the Ninth Circuit has not established a standard for determining a finding of "bad faith" in chapter 7 cases under § 707(b)(3)(A). Id.

However, a few bankruptcy courts have addressed the issue. Siegenberg at *3-4. (citing In re Mitchell, 357 B.R. 142 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2006)). The court in Mitchell, a chapter 7 case, used a nine-part test borrowing both from the Ninth Circuit's pre- BAPCPA "substantial abuse" test and from chapter 11 and 13 bad faith cases. Id. at 153–156 (citing: In re Price, 353 F.3d 1135, 1139–40 (9th Cir.2003)(using a six factor "totality of the circumstances test" to determine "substantial abuse" under pre- BAPCPA 707(b)); In re Leavitt, 171 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir.1999)(dismissing a chapter 13 for cause under §§ 349(a) and 1307(c), after a finding of bad faith employing a four part "totality of the circumstances" test)).

The court in Mitchell considered the following nine factors in determining whether "the debtor's intention in filing bankruptcy is inconsistent with the Chapter 7 goals of providing a ‘fresh start’ to debtors and maximizing return to creditors" and

11:00 AM

CONT...

Maisha Tamu Mesa

Chapter 7

whether the case should thus be dismissed under § 707(b)(3)(A):

Whether the chapter 7 debtor has a likelihood of sufficient future income to fund a chapter 11, 12, or 13 plan which would pay a substantial portion of the unsecured claims;
Whether debtor's petition was filed as a consequence of illness, disability, unemployment, or other calamity;
Whether debtor obtained cash advances and consumer goods on credit exceeding his or her ability to repay;
Whether debtor's proposed family budget is excessive or extravagant;
Whether debtor's statement of income and expenses misrepresents debtor's financial condition;
Whether debtor made eve of bankruptcy purchases;
Whether debtor has a history of bankruptcy petition filings and dismissals;
Whether debtor has invoked the automatic stay for improper purposes, such as to delay or defeat state court litigation;
Whether egregious behavior is present.

Mitchell at 154–55. No single factor is considered dispositive, Id. at 155 (citing: In re Powers, 135 B.R. 980, 991–92 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1991); In re Marshall, 298 B .R. 670, 681 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2003)), and fraudulent intent is not required for a finding of bad faith. Id. (citing Leavitt, 171 F.3d at 1224).

Here, the UST asserts as grounds for dismissal that:

The Debtor filed an incomplete petition on the Petition Date;
The Debtor failed to file the remaining documents by the Court-ordered deadline;
This is the Debtor’s third bankruptcy case filed since October 4, 2017 (Ex. 4);
The prior two cases were dismissed for failure to comply with the debtor’s duties;
The Court further takes judicial notice of multiple additional prior cases indicated on the Court’s docket as follows:
1. Case Number 17-18982, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 10/27/2017, Dismissed for Failure to File Information on 11/29/2017;
2. Case Number 17-18306, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 10/04/2017, Dismissed for Failure to File Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Maisha Tamu Mesa
  on 10/24/2017;
3. Case Number 07-11850, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 04/08/2007, Dismissed for Other Reason on 05/25/2007;
4. Case Number 03-20834, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 07/18/2003, Dismissed for Other Reason on 02/24/2004;
5. Case Number 04-14569, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 04/13/2004, Dismissed for Other Reason on 08/17/2004; and
6. Case Number 03-13994, Chapter 7 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 03/17/2003, Standard Discharge on 07/01/2003.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  The UST asserts that based on the dismissal of the Debtor’s prior cases for failure to file documents, the failure of the Debtor to comply with the duties of a debtor in two recent prior cases, the history of dismissed filings, and the filing of the instant case seemingly for no other purpose than to frustrate creditors, dismissal with a bar is warranted.
  
  Here, for the reasons set forth by the UST, based primarily on the history of filings, and the repeated conduct of the Debtor in failing to comply with Court- imposed deadlines, the Court finds that cause exists to dismiss the Debtor’s case. Additionally, the Debtors apparent attempts to file bankruptcy for the sole purpose of forestalling creditors warrants a one-year bar under the Court’s § 105 and § 349 authority as requested by the UST.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, including the Debtor’s failure to file opposition which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion under LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Maisha Tamu Mesa
  
  Chapter 7
  Maisha Tamu Mesa Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-17523
  
  Rowena I Argonza and Emerald D Argonza
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Motion for extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge for the
  U.S. Trustee EH
  Docket 17
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On September 7, 2017, Rowena and Emerald Argonza (collectively, the "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief.
  
  On December 11, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File a Complaint Objecting to Discharge ("Motion"). In support of the Motion, the UST asserts that the Debtors’ schedules indicate that they served as officers of a related chapter 11 case, Angeles of the Valley Hospice Care, LLC. The docket in the related chapter 11 case indicates that the Debtors were to receive $18,100 in insider compensation per month plus $1,000 in car allowances.
  
  Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 4004 and 1017, Trustee seeks to extend the deadline for Trustee and U.S. Trustee to file a complaint objecting to Debtor’s discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727 and the deadline to seek dismissal under § 707 , for an additional 60 days to January 25, 2018.
  
  Under FRBP 4004(a) and 1017(e), on a motion of any party in interest, the court may for cause extend the time to object to discharge or to seek dismissal. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4004, 1017.
  
  As a matter of practice what constitutes "cause" rests within the discretion of the bankruptcy court. See In re James, 187 B.R. 395, 397 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1995).
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Rowena I Argonza and Emerald D Argonza
  
  Chapter 7
  Also, Courts are generally unified in the view that the term "for cause" should receive a liberal construction. Id. Notwithstanding that fact, however, a creditor must exhibit some minimum degree of due diligence prior to seeking such an extension, and the Court should not allow the motion to serve as license for a baseless "fishing expedition." Id; See also In re Leary, 185 B.R. 405, 406 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1995). To establish cause movant must (1) show that he had, with reasonable diligence, attempted to investigate the facts and circumstances, and (2) offer a reasonable explanation of why that investigation could not be completed within the allotted time. See Bomarito, 448 B.R. at 251.
  
  The UST has presented evidence that they sought financial records of the related to their compensation in September 2017 and that the Debtors produced incomplete financial records in October 2017. The UST asserts that they Debtor’s counsel indicated that they require additional time to produce the documents sought by the UST. Finally, Debtors’ counsel indicated to the UST that the Debtors were agreeable to the extension of discharge and dismissal deadlines.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  Accordingly, based on the record provided by the UST and the failure of the Debtors to file opposition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the relief requested and provide the UST an extension for the filing of a complaint under § 727, and/or for the filing of a motion to dismiss under § 707, to February 12, 2018.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Rowena I Argonza Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Emerald D Argonza Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Rowena I Argonza and Emerald D Argonza
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-15816
  
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #3.00 CONT Landlords Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Re: Allow and Authorize Immediate Payment of One El Paseo North, LLCs Gap Rent Claim under Section 502(f) of the Bankruptcy Code
  (Holding Date) From: 9/27/17 EH
  Docket 29
  Tentative Ruling:
  9/27/17
  BACKGROUND
  
  On July 12, 2017, an involuntary Chapter 7 petition was filed against Integrated Wealth Management, Inc. ("Debtor"). After an extension of the applicable deadline, Debtor filed its answer on September 12, 2017.
  
  Prior to the answer being filed, One El Paseo North, LLC ("Landlord") filed a motion for immediate payment of its gap rent claim pursuant to § 502(f). Landlord asserts that it holds a gap rent claim totaling $27,776.73, covering the time period between the filing of the involuntary petition, on July 12, 2017, and the time Debtor abandoned the premises, on August 18, 2017.
  
  DISCUSSION
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  11 U.S.C. § 502(f) states:
  
  (f) In an involuntary case, a claim arising in the ordinary course of the debtor’s business or financial affairs after the commencement of the case but before the earlier of the appointment of the appointment of a trustee and the order for relief shall be determined as of the date such claim arises, and shall be allowed under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section or disallowed under subsection
  (d) or (e) of this section, the same as if such claim had arisen before the date of the filing of the petition.
  
  While Landlord is correct that the Bankruptcy Code allows payment of ordinary course business claims that accrue during the gap period, it is unclear what the legal justification is for Landlord’s request that the Court order the gap claim to be paid immediately. 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(3) specifically affords debts incurred pursuant to § 502(f) third-priority status. If the estate is administratively insolvent, or does not have funds to pay all first, second, and third-priority claims, then Landlord would not receive full payment of its claim. Because Landlord may not receive full payment of its claim, it would be inappropriate to order immediate payment of its claim.
  
  Debtor further objects to the issuance of an order allowing Landlord’s claim, asserting that a motion to allow a claim for an unpaid § 502(f) claim is procedurally improper. The Court disagrees with Debtor’s contention that a party cannot seek allowance of an administrative claim separate from filing a proof of claim. As an order for relief has not yet been entered, however, the relief requested is premature, since, among other things, a Chapter 7 trustee has not had the opportunity to vet the request. As an aside, the Court notes that Landlord has filed a proof of claim, but it did not request administrative priority.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  The Court will DENY the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
  Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
  Movant(s):
  One El Paseo North, LLC Represented By Thomas J Polis
  11:00 AM
  6:16-21223
  
  Kelly Arnold
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 6,278.48 Trustee Expenses: $ 52.26
  
  Attorneys Fees: $ 10,045.50 Attorneys Expenses: $ 456.27
  
  Accountant: $1,000
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative. Additionally, the Trustee is authorized to pay all other administrative costs outlined in the TFR.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Kelly Arnold Represented By
  Todd L Turoci
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Kelly Arnold
  
  Chapter 7
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
  11:00 AM
  6:16-20320
  
  Joyce Miller Black
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 Motion for Turnover of Estate Property held by Debtors pursuant to 11 USC sect 542(A) and (E)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 15
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On November 21, 2016 ("Petition Date"), Joyce Miller Black ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 7 relief. Larry Simons is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the bankruptcy estate is the right to refunds to which the Debtor was entitled in 2016. The Trustee sought copies of the Debtor’s state and federal tax returns but only received a copy of the Debtor’s Federal 2016 tax returns.
  
  On December 18, 2017, the Trustee filed his Motion for Turnover of Property held by Debtor pursuant to 11 USC 542(a) and (e) (the "Motion"). The Motion was properly served on the Debtor and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  Under the Bankruptcy Code, "any entity, other than a custodian, in possession, custody or control of property that the trustee may use, sell, or lease under section 363 of this title ... shall deliver to the trustee, and account for, such property or the value of such property " Id. § 542(a). Additionally, subject to any applicable privilege, after
  notice and a hearing, the court may order an attorney, accountant, or other person that holds recorded information, including books, documents, records, and papers, relating to the debtor's property or financial affairs, to turn over or disclose such recorded information to the trustee. 11 U.S.C. § 542(e).
  
  The Trustee seeks an order directing the Debtor to turn over to him 92% (or
  $1,832.64) of her 2016 tax refunds from her state and federal tax returns for 2016 (which the Trustee asserts cannot be exempted), and an order directing turnover by the
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Joyce Miller Black
  
  Chapter 7
  Debtor of a copy of her 2016 State of California tax return.
  
  In support of the Motion, the Trustee has filed a declaration attesting to his requests to the Debtor’s counsel for turnover of the funds and the state tax return. To date, the Debtor has not complied with the Trustee’s informal requests. Pursuant to § 542 (a) and (e), in addition to the Debtor’s failure to file opposition to the Trustee’s Motion, which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the relief requested pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court finds that the Trustee has adequately demonstrated that the relief requested is warranted.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety. Trustee to appear and discuss setting of deadlines for turnover. The Trustee is authorized to appear telephonically.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Joyce Miller Black Represented By George P Hobson Jr
  Movant(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:16-20056
  
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell and Kelly Jean Tyrrell
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 60
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee, and Accountant for Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees:
  $8,955.77
  Trustee Expenses:
  $40
  Attorneys Fees:
  $11,024
  Attorneys Expenses:
  $448.28
  Accountant Fees:
  $1,863
  Accountant Expenses: $253.30
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell Represented By Matthew Abbasi
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell and Kelly Jean Tyrrell
  
  Chapter 7
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelly Jean Tyrrell Represented By Matthew Abbasi
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes Laila Masud
  11:00 AM
  6:16-16711
  
  Jaime Gutierrez Reyes
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 48
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees: $3,136.98 Trustee Expenses: $111.59
  
  The Trustee may submit on the tentative. Additionally, the flat fee payments to Counsel and Accountant are approved for payment by the Trustee.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jaime Gutierrez Reyes Represented By David R Chase
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By
  Misty A Perry Isaacson
  11:00 AM
  6:14-24313
  
  Clausen and Cobb Management Company Inc
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #8.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 28
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 2,453.11 Trustee Expenses: $ 69.45
  
  Accountant Fees: $3,702.50 Accountant Expenses $305.70
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
  
  APPERANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Clausen and Cobb Management Represented By Joy Dhokia
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:14-23544
  
  S.T.I. Inc. Trucking and Materials
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 228
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 3,250 Trustee Expenses: $ 226.94
  
  Attorneys Fees: $ 9,891 Attorneys Expenses: $ 666.91
  
  Accountant: $1,000
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative. Additionally, the Trustee is authorized to pay all other administrative costs outlined in the TFR.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  S.T.I. Inc. Trucking and Materials Represented By
  Stephen R Wade
  W. Derek May
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  S.T.I. Inc. Trucking and Materials
  
  Amelia Puertas-Samara
  
  Chapter 7
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  Levene Neale Bender Yoo & Brill LLP
  11:00 AM
  6:14-21837
  
  David J. Varela
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #10.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 142
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 5,068.12
  
  Attorneys Fees: $ 27,869.00 (per Stipulation with UST) Attorneys Expenses: $ 1,174.47
  
  Accountant: $1,825
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative. Additionally, the Trustee is authorized to pay all other administrative costs outlined in the TFR.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  David J. Varela Represented By Thomas J Tedesco
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  David J. Varela
  
  Chapter 7
  Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By Nina Z Javan
  Meghann A Triplett Noreen A Madoyan
  11:00 AM
  6:14-14377
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #11.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Lien 956 South Calle Tomas, Palm Springs, Ca 92264 with Robert A. Nellessen
  
  From: 11/29/17 EH
  Docket 45
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/28/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/29/2017
  
  The Court is inclined to allow the parties the opportunity to obtain appraisals or other valuations of the subject property.
  
  Alternatively, Debtor’s evidence of the amount of the lien of Wells Fargo refers to the balance as of the filing of the motion. While Debtor is free to brief the appropriate time for determining the amount of a lien, in the absence of any argument on the issue, the Court concludes that the appropriate date is the petition date.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  Elizabeth A LaRocque
  11:00 AM
  6:13-30477
  
  Master Design Inc
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #12.00 Motion To Approve Compromise Resolving All Pending Litigation EH
  Docket 118
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/24/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  On December 27, 2013 (the "Petition Date"), Master Design Inc (the "Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 7 relief. Steven Speier is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee (the "Trustee").
  
  On December 23, 2015, the Trustee filed his Complaint against Defendants Test-Rite Products Corp, Test-Rite International (U.S.) Co. LTD., Test-Rite International Co. LTD ("Test-Rite Taiwan"), Judy Lee, Chester Lee, and Christina Ma (collectively, the "Defendants"). The Trustee’s initial Complaint included claims for recovery of Fraudulent Transfers (both for actual and constructive fraud), for conversion and unlawful payment of dividends, for breach of fiduciary duty, and finally, seeking declaratory relief as to alter ego (the "Complaint").
  
  On April 27, 2016, the Court held hearings on the Defendants’ first motions to dismiss the Complaint which were granted in part and denied in part, with leave given to the Trustee to amend his Complaint. On May 25, 2016, the Trustee filed his First Amended Complaint (the "FAC").
  
  Subsequently, the Court heard and determined Defendants’ motions to dismiss the FAC in August 2016. Answers were filed thereafter.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Master Design Inc
  On December 28, 2017, the Trustee filed a Motion To Approve Compromise
  
  Chapter 7
  Resolving All Pending Litigation (the "Motion"). Service is proper and the Motion is unopposed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  Rule 9019(a) authorizes the bankruptcy court to approve a compromise or settlement on the trustee's motion and after notice and a hearing. The bankruptcy court must consider all "factors relevant to a full and fair assessment of the wisdom of the proposed compromise." Protective Comm. for Indep. Stockholders of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson, 390 U.S. 414, 424, 88 S. Ct. 1157, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1968). In
  other words, the bankruptcy court must find that the settlement is "fair and equitable" in order to approve it. Martin v. Kane (In re A & C Props.), 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986).
  In conducting this inquiry, the bankruptcy court must consider the following
  factors:
  
  Id.
  1. the probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it; and (d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.
    
    The bankruptcy court enjoys broad discretion in approving a compromise because it "is uniquely situated to consider the equities and reasonableness [of it] " United
    States v. Alaska Nat'l Bank (In re Walsh Construction, Inc.), 669 F.2d 1325, 1328 (9th Cir. 1982). As stated in A & C Props.:
    The purpose of a compromise agreement is to allow the trustee and the creditors to avoid the expenses and burdens associated with litigating sharply contested and dubious claims. The law favors compromise and
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Master Design Inc
    not litigation for its own sake, and as long as the bankruptcy court amply considered the various factors that determined the reasonableness of the compromise, the court's decision must be affirmed.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Id. (citations omitted).
    
    On the other hand, even though the bankruptcy court has wide latitude in approving compromises, its discretion is not completely unfettered. See Woodson v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (In re Woodson), 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). The trustee bears the burden of proving to the bankruptcy court that the settlement is fair and equitable and should be approved. In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d at 1382.
    Here, the Trustee has provided an adequate basis for settlement. In particular, the Trustee has outlined the potential difficulties in collection and the expenses and problems associated with potential extrajudicial proceedings in Taiwan. These two factors alone weigh heavily in favor of granting the Motion. However, additionally, the Court is itself familiar with the complexity of the underlying factual and legal issues related to the transfer pricing scheme allegations brought by the Trustee and the hurdles presented by discovery issues in the case – in particular, the need to translate voluminous documents from Chinese to English for purposes of analysis and litigation. Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that the Trustee’s settlement for a payment of $735,000 to the estate is reasonable and in the best interests of creditors.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, the Motion is GRANTED in its entirety. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
    Movant(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
    11:00 AM
    6:11-12917
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #13.00 CONT Order to Show Cause Hearing Why Matthew Resnik, Brad and Deborah Stoddard should not be sanctioned
    (Holding date)
    
    From: 8/31/17, 10/2/17, 10/18/17, 11/15/17, 12/20/17
    
    EH
    
    Docket 110
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    01/24/2018
    The Court having received informal notice of a pending settlement between the parties, the hearing on this matter shall be continued to February 14, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for the parties to finalize an agreement. Should the matter be resolved prior to the continued hearing, the February 14 hearing shall come off calendar.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Telephonic appearances are authorized for the February 14, 2018, continued hearing.
    
    10/18/17
    
    BACKGROUND
    
    On January 28, 2011, Brad & Deborah Stoddard ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On May 24, 2011, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The plan contained the following provision, section V.F.: "The debt of american Education Services will be discharged; the school has been stripped of accreditation and is on probation." On December 5, 2016, Debtors received a discharge, and, on January 13, 2017, the case was closed.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    
    On May 11, 2017, Debtors filed a motion for an order to show cause why creditor American Educational Services ("AES") should not be held in contempt court, and for damages and attorney’s fees, for intentionally violating the discharge injunction.
    Because of inadequate service, the motion was originally denied without prejudice, and Debtors refiled the motion on June 1, 2017. AES filed its opposition on June 8, 2017. At a hearing on the matter on July 27, 2017, the Court continued the matter to October 2, 2017.
    
    On July 31, 2017, the Court issued its Order to Show Cause why Matthew Resnik ("Resnik"), Brad Stoddard, and Deborah Stoddard should not be sanctioned for including a prohibited provision in a Chapter 13 plan (the "OSC"). Debtors filed their opposition on August 14, 2017. Resnik filed his opposition on August 17, 2017. AES filed its reply on August 24, 2017. Resnick filed supplemental responses on September 21 and 22, 2017.
    
    DISCUSSION
    1. Introduction
      
      The OSC is issued in light of, and accordance with, the Supreme Court’s decision in United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa, 559 U.S. 260 (2010). In Espinosa, the bankruptcy court had confirmed a Chapter 13 plan which purported to discharge student loan debt without complying with the applicable procedural requirements.
      After intercepting debtor’s income tax refund to use towards payment of student loans, the creditor argued that the bankruptcy court’s order confirming the debtor’s Chapter 13 plan should be declared void. The Supreme Court held that, absent a jurisdictional or due process violation (which was not present) the bankruptcy court’s legal error in confirming the Chapter 13 plan with a provision that impermissibly discharged student loan debt, did not render the order void. At the conclusion of its opinion, the Supreme Court opined:
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
      
      Chapter 13
      
      We acknowledge the potential for bad-faith litigation tactics. But expanding the availability of relief under Rule 60(b)(4) is not an appropriate prophylaxis. As we stated in Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz, 503 U.S. 638 (1992), "debtors and their attorneys face penalties under various provisions for engaging in improper conduct in bankruptcy proceedings." Id. at 644; see also FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011. The specter of such penalties should deter bad-faith attempts to discharge student loan debt without the undue hardship finding Congress required.
      
      Espinosa, 559 U.S. at 278. Here, the Court is tasked with interpreting and implementing the guidance provided by the Supreme Court in Espinosa.
      
      Debtors and Resnick have filed separate responses to the Court’s OSC. Debtors have raised five arguments in their opposition: (1) that the Court already found that the plan was filed in good faith; (2) that the plan must be given res judicata effect; (3) that the Court is exceeding its discretionary sanctioning authority; (4) that the OSC is an illegal ex post facto law; and (5) that FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011 is inapplicable.
      Resnick offers the following categories of arguments in his opposition: (1) use of the Court’s inherent sanctioning authority is inappropriate here; (2) Rule 9011 sanctions require a contempt finding; (3) Section 105 is inapplicable; and (4) the plan provision at issue is not prohibited. The Court will analyze the respondents’ arguments separately.
    2. Debtors’ Opposition
      1. The Court’s Good Faith Finding
        
        11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(3) states:
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        
        Except as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm a plan if –
        (3) the plan has been proposed in good faith and not by any means forbidden by law
        
        Debtors argue that: "[i]t necessarily follows [from § 1325(a)(3)] that the Court has already made an express finding that the Plan was filed in good faith." This result does not necessarily follow from the language of the statute. The plain language of § 1325(a) operates to eliminate the discretion of the court if the court finds that the debtor has satisfied the nine subsections of § 1325(a); the provision does not state the consequences of a finding that some, but not all, of the § 1325(a) subsections have been satisfied. As is stated by the leading bankruptcy treatise:
        
        The standards set forth in section 1325(a), however, are not requirements that must be met in every case before a plan can be confirmed. Unlike section 1322(a), section 1325(a) does not state that "the plan shall" comply with its listed criteria. Nor does it state, as does section 1129(a), that the court shall confirm the plan only if certain requirements are met. Instead it states only that if its criteria are met the court must confirm the plan. Therefore, the court has discretion to confirm a plan that does not comply with all of the standards of section 1325(a), particularly if no party objects.
        
        8 COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.01 (16th ed. 2016) (footnotes omitted).
        
        Despite the plain language of the statute, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, without any independent analysis, and relying on an out of circuit bankruptcy court decision, has determined that the requirements of § 1325(a) are mandatory for Chapter 13 plan confirmation. See In Chinichian, 784 F.2d 1440, 1443-44 (9th Cir. 1986) ("For a court to confirm a plan, each of the requirements of section 1325 must be present and the debtor has the burden of proving that each element has been met.") (citing In re Elkind, 11 B.R. 473, 476 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1981)). While it remains unclear from
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        where the mandatory characterization of § 1325(a) arose, a variety of courts have, in passing, assumed that the § 1325(a) standards are mandatory for plan confirmation. See, e.g., Assocs. Comm. Corp. v. Rash, 520 U.S. 953, 956 (1997) ("To qualify for confirmation under Chapter 13, the Rashes’ plan had to satisfy the requirements set forth in § 1325(a) of the Code."); Shaw v. Aurgroup Fin. Credit Union, 552 F.3d 447, 459 (6th Cir. 2009) ("Numerous district and bankruptcy courts outside the Fifth, Ninth, Tent, and Eleventh Circuits, including courts within this circuit, have also held, suggested, or assumed that the provision in § 1325(a) are mandatory.") (collecting cases). But see In re Szostek, 886 F.2d 1405, 1411 (3rd Cir. 1989) ("On the other hand, if the conditions of § 1325 are not met, although the requirements of § 1322 are fulfilled, the court has the discretion to confirm the plan. If Congress had intended for
        § 1325(a) to be mandatory, it could have included that requirement with the requirements already listed in § 1322); see also Matter of Escobedo, 28 F.3d 34, 34 (7th Cir. 1994) ("We note, however, as did the court in Szostek, that while the provisions of § 1325(a)(5) may be discretionary[,] the requirements of § 1322(a)(2) are mandatory.). Indeed, even Espinosa appears to implicitly assume that the § 1325(a) requirements are mandatory. See 559 U.S. 260, 277 ("That is because § 1325(a) instructs a bankruptcy court to confirm a plan only if the court finds, inter alia, that the plan complies with the ‘applicable provisions’ of the Code.") (emphasis added). Therefore, it would appear that binding case law suggests that the § 1325(a) requirements, including good faith, are mandatory requirements for confirmation.
      2. Res Judicata
        
        While the Court accepts Debtors’ argument that, by confirming their Chapter 13 plan, the Court implicitly found that the plan was filed in good faith, the Court rejects Debtors’ argument that that finding is res judicata with regard to the Court. 11 U.S.C.
        § 1327(a) states: "The provisions of a confirmed plan bind the debtor and each creditor, whether or not the claim of such creditor is provided for by the plan, and whether or not such creditor has objected to, has accepted, or has rejected the plan." The Court is not a creditor and Debtors have advanced no argument as to how
        § 1327(a) would prevent the Court from revisiting its finding of good faith. In fact, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion that concluded the § 1325(a) requirements were mandatory stated the following: "Because section 1325(a)(3) of Title 11 requires the Chinichians to propose their plan in good faith, the bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to revoke a plan if the plan was not filed in good faith." In re Chinichian, 784 F.2d 1440, 1442 (9th Cir. 1986). The Ninth Circuit’s further comments indicate
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        that it believed such powers were expansive:
        
        The Chinichians argue, however, that because section 1330 is a specific statute it should govern the more general section 105. The Mancari rationale that a specific statute cannot be nullified by a more general one is only applicable where a conflict exists.
        
        Section 1330 provides a method of revoking a confirmation order "on request of a party in interest." While it does not specifically authorize such a revocation by the court sua sponte, it does not prohibit such action. Section 105 constitutes authority for the court to issue any order necessary to carry out the provisions of the Code. That reservoir of power in no manner conflicts with the authority to act upon the request of an interested party, but constitutes a supplemental method of revocation in the event of fraud. It would be absurd to hold that the bankruptcy court is powerless to correct a fraud unless first requested by an interested party, and that is not what section 1330 provides.
        
        Section 105 sets out the power of the bankruptcy court to fashion orders as necessary pursuant to the purposes of the Bankruptcy Code.
        
        Further, a bankruptcy court is a court of equity. As a court of equity, it may look through form to the substance of a transaction and devise new remedies where those at law are inadequate. Further, it can modify or vacate its order so long as no intervening right has become vested in reliance thereon. Thus, the bankruptcy court had equitable power to revoke its order partially confirming the Chinichians’ plan once it recognized the Chinichians did not file their plan in good faith as required by section 1325(a)(3).
        
        Id. at 1442-43 (citations omitted).
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        Debtors’ argument that § 1327 operates to prevent the Court from modifying its implicit good faith finding when confirming the plan lacks merit. The statute states that the terms of the provisions of a confirmed plan are binding on the debtor and creditors. The Court is not a creditor or a debtor nor is the Court’s good faith finding a provision of a confirmed plan. Nor does res judicata prevent a court from revoking or amending its own order. Such a principle would eliminate the ability to revoke or modify a judgment altogether, rendering obsolete FED. R. CIV. P. Rules 59 & 60, in addition to many others legal provisions. Debtors’ argument that the Court is bound by its own previous finding due to res judiciata is not compelling.
      3. The Court Lacks Authority to Issue Sanctions
        
        Debtors’ argument that the Court lacks authority to issue sanctions can be summarized in the following: (1) the Court is precluded from finding that the plan was proposed in bad faith due to res judicata; and (2) the Court must find that the plan was proposed in bad faith for sanctions to be warranted. Because the Court rejects (1), as outlined above, Debtors’ argument must fail.
      4. The OSC is an "Illegal Ex Post Facto Law"
        
        In their fourth argument, Debtors argue that this OSC is an ex post facto law. As noted by Debtors, Art. 1 §§ 9 & 10 of the Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws. Article 1 of the Constitution deals with the legislative branch – the branch of the government that makes laws. The Judicial Branch does not make laws. Debtors’ argument that a court order is an ex post facto law is therefore, necessarily, invalid.
      5. Rule 9011 is Inapplicable
        
        FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(b)(2) states:
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        
        By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a petition, pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, --
        
        (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law
        
        FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(c)(1)(B) states: "[O]n its own initiative, the court may enter an order describing the specific conduct that appears to violate subdivision (b) and directing an attorney, law firm, or party to show cause why it has not violated subdivision (b) with respect thereto."
        
        Debtors’ nine subsection argument why FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011 is inapplicable is rather chaotic and disorganized. Regardless, the Court acknowledges that, as to Debtors, Rule 9011 sanctions are inapplicable due to the operation of Rule 9011(c)(2) (A). Therefore, the Court agrees that Rule 9011 cannot operate as the source of sanctions against Debtors.
    3. Resnick’s Opposition
  A. Inherent Sanctioning Authority
  
  The Supreme Court has stated: "it is firmly established that the power to punish for contempts is inherent in all courts." Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991) (quoting Ex parte Robinson, 19 Wall. 505, 510 (1874)); see also Fink v. Gomez, 239
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  1. 3d 989, 992 (9th Cir. 2001) ("[T]he district court has the inherent authority to impose sanctions for bad faith, which includes a broad range of willful improper conduct."). The Ninth Circuit has stated: "Itel teaches that sanctions are justified when a party acts for an improper purpose – even if the act consists of making a truthful statement or a non-frivolous argument or objection. Fink, 239 F.3d at 922; see also In re Dyer, 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing bad faith and willful misconduct).
  Nevertheless, as Resnick states: "when there is bad-faith conduct in the course of litigation that could be adequately sanctioned under the Rules, the court ordinarily should rely on the Rules rather than the inherent power." Chambers, 501 U.S. at 50. Because the Court believes that the existing framework provides an adequate basis for sanctions in this type of situation, the Court need not rely on its inherent sanctioning authority.
  
  B. Rule 9011
  
  When imposing sanctions, sua sponte, under FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011, "sanctions ‘will ordinarily be imposed only in situations that are akin to a contempt of court.’" United Nat’l Ins. Co. v. R&D Latex Corp., 242 F.3d 1102, 1116 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Barber v. Miller, 146 F.3d 707, 711 (9th Cir. 1998); see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 11, Advisory Committee Notes ("Since show cause orders will ordinarily be issued only in situations that are akin to a contempt of court, the rule does not provide a ‘safe harbor’ to a litigant for withdrawing a claim, defense, etc., after a show cause has been issued on the court’s own initiative."). "[P]rior to imposing court-initiated sanctions, the district court is required to determine whether counsel’s conduct is ‘akin to contempt.’" Gonzalez v. Texaco Inc., 344 Fed. Appx. 304, 308 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting R&D Latex Corp., 242 F.3d 1102, 1118)).
  
  In this situation, the Court defers to Bankruptcy Judge TeSelle:
  
  At the hearing on the motions to dismiss conducted by the Court in these cases
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  on May 2, 2000, it was clear to the Court that debtors’ counsel included these plan provisions in the hope that they would trap an unwary student loan creditor. If a plan containing a student loan discharge provision is confirmed, debtors and their counsel argue that the student loan obligation is discharged under the theory of res judicata, improperly relying on a skewed interpretation of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in In re Andersen, 179 F.3d 1253 (10th Cir. 1999) to support their position. If an objection to confirmation is raised by either the Trustee or the student loan creditor, the offending language is simply removed from the plan, and debtors are no worse off for their attempt. The Court will not permit this type of gamesmanship on the part of debtors and their counsel to continue. Conduct such as this has no place in the practice of bankruptcy law, and will not be tolerated by this Court.
  
  The citation of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit in Andersen, supra, as authority for the practice of intentionally inserting language in a chapter 13 plan that violates the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, and as authorizing counsel to stand by silently and thereby induce the Court to confirm a plan that contains a provision that counsel knows violates the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, is at once offensive and specious. Counsel appearing before this Court are officers of the Court and are ethically obligated to inform the Court if they are aware of the existence of a plan provision that renders the plan non- confirmable.
  
  Rather than recognizing their obligations to the Court and to opposing counsel, counsel for debtors in these cases go so far as to suggest that they are compelled by Andersen to recommend that their clients include these unlawful plan provisions, implying that their failure to do so might be an act of professional negligence. The Court does not believe that a fair reading of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit in Andersen can reasonably lead one to conclude that the Tenth Circuit intended to encourage the practice of intentionally inserting unlawful plan provisions in the hope that confirmation of the plan will occur and the time for appeal will pass before such provisions are noticed so that debtors and their counsel can then claim res judicata. Such a skewed reading of Andersen fails to account for the ethical obligations owed by members of the bar to the Court and to each other.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  This is particularly true given the volume of chapter 13 filings in this district, and the fact that the Court does not have the time to independently review every chapter 13 plan and confirmation order to determine whether an attempt to unlawfully discharge a student loan obligation is being made. Because the Court has apparently been unable to rely on the ethical conduct of some of the counsel representing chapter 13 debtors appearing before it, the Court, up to his point in time, has been forced to rely on a party in interest other than the debtor to point out those instances in which such student loan discharges have been attempted through plan provisions. Where the Court has become aware of such attempts, either through objections by the student loan creditor or through the inclusion of such a provision in the order confirming the chapter 13 plan, the Court has refused to confirm the plan containing such language, and has stricken language from confirmation orders attempting to effect a discharge of student loan indebtedness in this manner.
  
  . . .
  
  In light of the existing case law concerning the impropriety of the inclusion of such student loan discharge provisions in chapter 13 plans, and the unambiguous language of the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, the Court believes that the inclusion of such a provision in a chapter 13 plan and/or order confirming a chapter 13 plan is both unethical and sanctionable conduct pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9011. Bankruptcy Rule 9011(b) concerns representations made to the Court. It states that by presenting a paper to the Court, an attorney or unrepresented party certifies to the best of his or her knowledge, information and belief, formed after a reasonable inquiry under the circumstances, that the legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law. See FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(b)(2).
  
  . . .
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  The Court refuses to allow counsel for debtors to turn the inclusion of a student loan discharge provision in a chapter 13 plan into a "can’t lose" proposition. The Court therefore concludes that Andersen provides no protection from the imposition of sanctions under Rule 9011(b) in cases in
  
  Chapter 13
  which a student loan discharge provision is included in a confirmed chapter 13 plan.
  
  In re Hensley, 249 B.R. 318, 320-323 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 2000).
  
  C. Section 105
  
  11 U.S.C. § 105(a) states:
  1. The court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. No provision of this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary to enforce or implement court orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process.
    
    Resnick offers a single argument in support of his position that § 105(a) is inapplicable: that the provision only applies to violations of a specific court order. Resnick cites In re Dyer in support of this statement. 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir. 2003) ("Civil contempt authority allows a court to remedy a violation of a specific order (including ‘automatic’ orders, such as the automatic stay or discharge injunction).").
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    
    Dyer does not explicitly state that § 105(a) is strictly limited to remedying violations of specific court orders, nor does it cite any authority from which it could be inferred that the Dyer court had such an opinion. Indeed § 105(a) explicitly mentions, in addition to court orders, rules and "abuse of process"; the latter might be invoked in the absence of a specific court order.
    
    The Supreme Court, on two occasions after Dyer, has written an opinion which indicates that § 105 is not strictly limited to correcting violations of specific court orders. First, in Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass., the Supreme Court wrote:
    
    On the contrary, the broad authority granted to bankruptcy judges to take any action that is necessary or appropriate to prevent an abuse of process described in § 105(a) of the Code, is surely adequate to authorize an immediate denial of a motion to convert filed under § 706 in lieu of a conversion order that merely postpones the allowance of equivalent relief and may provide a debtor with an opportunity to take action prejudicial to creditors.
    
    549 U.S. 365, 375 (2007) (footnote omitted). The "abuse of process" referenced in Marrama was not a violation of a specific court order, but, rather, "an unmeritorious attempt to qualify as a debtor under Chapter 13." Id.
    
    Second, in Law v. Siegel, the Supreme Court stated: "Section 105(a) confers authority to ‘carry out’ the provisions of the Code." This statement is natural, since the first sentence of § 105(a) states: "[t]he court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title."
    
    Here, the Court concludes that a specific and definite court order has not been violated. Nevertheless, the reconciliation of Dyer and Marrama helps illustrate the proper approach forward. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s instructions that
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    sanctions under § 105(a) are appropriate for violation of a specific and definite court order is derived from the non-bankruptcy standard for civil contempt. See F.T.C. v. Affordable Media, 179 F.3d 1228, 1239 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Stone v. City & Cnty. of S.F., 968 F.2d 850, 856 n.9 (9th Cir. 1992)) ("The moving party has the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that the contemnors violated a specific and definite order of the court. The burden then shifts to the contemnors to demonstrate why they were unable to comply."). Nevertheless, as illustrated by Marrama, the Court’s authority under § 105(a) is not strictly limited to issuing sanctions for civil contempt. While a civil contempt finding under § 105(a) may not be appropriate in these circumstances, it does not follow that the Court lacks the ability to adequately and equitably resolve this situation.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing for approximately thirty days to allow Debtors to file a supplemental brief addressing why they should not be sanctioned pursuant to the Court’s inherent sanctioning authority. No further briefing from Resnick is requested.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Brad Stoddard Represented By Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Deborah Ann Stoddard Represented By Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
    Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
    2:00 PM
    6:16-16191
    
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01028 Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Tanaka et al
    
    #14.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01028. Complaint by Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee against Ronald Howard Tanaka, Carolyn Naomi Tanaka, Ryan Satoshi Tanaka, Leora Linda Tanaka, Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Probate Estate. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Sale of Real Property Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h); and (2) Turnover of Property of the Estate Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 542 (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property))
    
    From: 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 8/2/17 EH
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
    Defendant(s):
    Ronald Howard Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
    Carolyn Naomi Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
    Ryan Satoshi Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
    Leora Linda Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher
    
    Chapter 7
    Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Represented By
    David L Prince
    Plaintiff(s):
    Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
    Monserrat Morales
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monserrat Morales
    2:00 PM
    6:16-13096
    
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01219 Candee et al v. Ayoub et al
    
    #15.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Keith H Candee, Original Thurber Ranch LLC against Tarek El Sayed Ayoub, Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub
    
    From: 11/1/16, 6/7/17 EH
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Defendant(s):
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Gabriela Villeda Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Plaintiff(s):
    Keith H Candee Represented By Jon H Lieberg
    Original Thurber Ranch LLC Represented By Jon H Lieberg
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub
    
    Chapter 7
    Wesley H Avery (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons
    2:00 PM
    6:13-29922
    
    Nancy Ann Howell
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell
    
    #16.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment
    (Holding Date)
    
    From: 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17
    
    Also #17 EH
    Docket 62
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
    Defendant(s):
    Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
    Andrew S Bisom
    Plaintiff(s):
    Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
    Andrew S Bisom
    Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Nancy Ann Howell
    
    Chapter 7
    2:00 PM
    6:13-29922
    
    Nancy Ann Howell
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell
    
    #17.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01070. Complaint by Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom, Eisenberg Law Firm, APC against Nancy Ann Howell. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))
    
    From: 5/14/14, 7/2/14, 12/10/14, 3/18/15, 4/22/15, 5/20/15, 7/22/15, 10/28/15, 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17
    
    Also #16 EH
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
    Defendant(s):
    Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
    Andrew S Bisom
    Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-11261
    
    Ernie Macias
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #1.00 CONT Order to show cause why Alon Darvish should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 105 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020
    CASE DISMISSED 3/13/17
    
    From: 11/30/17 EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/12/18 AT 12:30 PM
    Tentative Ruling:
    11/30/17
    BACKGROUND
    On February 21, 2017, Ernie Macias ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtor’s case was filed by Alon Darvish ("Darvish"). On March 13, 2017, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file information.
    
    On March 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Disgorge Attorney’s Fees ("Disgorgement Motion"). On June 13, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the UST’s Disgorgement Motion (the "Disgorgement Order"). The Disgorgement Order required Darvish to file his disclosure of compensation, and to disgorge fees received from the Debtor back to him.
    
    On September 20, 2017, the UST filed its Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why Alon Darvish Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11
    U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020 (the "Motion for OSC"). The Motion for OSC specifically asserted that Darvish had failed to comply with any part of the Disgorgement Order. The UST’s Motion for OSC further asserted that Darvish had repeatedly failed to disclose compensation and had been sanctioned for such conduct under similar circumstances in at least 6 other cases. (Motion for OSC at 9).
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ernie Macias
    On October 20, 2017, the Court granted the Motion for OSC and ordered
    
    Chapter 13
    Darvish to show cause why he should not be held in contempt (the "OSC"). Darvish filed his response to the OSC on November 16, 2017 ("Response"). On November 21, 2017, the UST replied to the Response.
    
    DISCUSSION
    In his Response, Darvish indicated that his practice includes the filing of skeletal petitions for chapter 13 debtors for the purpose of stopping foreclosures. He indicated that when such skeletal petitions are filed, his software does not file the Disclosure of Compensation. Darvish asserts that he is a solo practitioner who is overwhelmed and understaffed and who is trying to rectify the issues in his practice. In Reply, the UST objects particularly to Darvish’s failure to outline specific steps he intends to take to remedy the issues at his firm. The UST is also concerned that Darvish has essentially admitted that his practice includes the filing of abusive petitions intended solely to avoid foreclosures. The UST requests that the Court continue the matter for Darvish to set forth specific remedial actions as ordered. The UST also requests that the Court separately consider whether a separate order to show cause is justified based on Darvish’s inherently abusive prevention practice.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court agrees with the UST that Darvish’s explanation is insufficient. Darvish’s Response indicates clearly the reason for the failure to file disclosure of compensation forms. Despite this fact, he does not explain the ongoing failure to file these forms, particularly where he has previously been sanctioned for failing to disclose his compensation. The ongoing failure to file required documents, despite having already been sanctioned, supports the UST’s request for a specific plan of remediation. Absent such plan, Darvish may simply continue to rely on his thus far unreliable bankruptcy filing software.
    
    Separately, the UST’s concern regarding Darvish’s practice of filing skeletal petitions is well-taken. In particular, if Darvish is advising his clients to file abusive petitions to
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ernie Macias
    
    Chapter 13
    delay foreclosure, such conduct may warrant further sanctions/discipline.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ernie Macias Represented By
    Alon Darvish
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-15102
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #2.00 Motion for Order Disallowing Claim of Rela Time Resolutions (Claim #5) EH
    Docket 47
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/25/18
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On June 19, 2017, Gwendolyn Washington ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Previously, on August 1, 2012, Debtor obtained a discharge in a Chapter 7 proceeding. On July 10, 2017, Debtor filed a motion to avoid lien with "Option One Mortgage Corp serviced by Real Time Resolutions Inc." This lien predated the petition date of Debtor’s Chapter 7 case. On August 8, 2017, the Court entered an order granting the motion. Section 4b(4) of the form order states: "The claim of the junior lienholder is to be treated as an unsecured claim and is to be paid through the plan pro rata with all other unsecured claims." Section 4b(5) of the form order states:
    
    The junior lienholder’s claim on the deed of trust, mortgage or lien shall be allowed as a non-priority general unsecured claim in the amount per the filed Proof of Claim. The junior lienholder is not required to, but may file an amended Proof of Claim listing its claim as an unsecured claim to be paid in accordance it the Debtor’s chapter 13 plan. If an amended claim is not filed, the trustee may treat any claim on the debt (secured or unsecured) filed by the junior lienholder as unsecured upon entry of this order.
    
    On August 17, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 case was confirmed. On August 29, 2017,
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    Real Time Resolutions, Inc. ("Creditor") filed a secured claim in the amount of
    $307,049.79, including arrears in the amount of $177,235.84 ("Claim 5"). On December 15, 2017, Debtor filed an objection to Claim 5. The basis for Debtor’s objection is that her personal liability on Claim 5 was discharged in a previous bankruptcy case, and the Court’s order avoiding the lien of Creditor means that the claim is no longer secured.
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    1. Claim Objection
      
      Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
      
      When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re
      12:30 PM
      CONT...
      
      Gwendolyn Washington
      
      Chapter 13
      Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    2. Summary of Analysis
    The avoidance of a consensual lien in a Chapter 13 case is effectuated by a two-step process. First, the Court engages in a § 506(a) valuation, bifurcating the claim into secured and unsecured portions. Then the Court applies § 1322(b)(2). If the § 506(a) valuation results in a "secured claim[s], other than a claim secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence" or an unsecured claim, then the plan may modify the rights of the creditor under § 1322(b)(2), avoiding the lien. This results because the Supreme Court has concluded that after a § 506(a) valuation, a wholly underwater junior lien is to be treated as an unsecured claim, and unsecured claims are subject to modification under § 1322(b)(2).
    
    If the debtor’s personal liability on the underlying debt has been discharged in a previous bankruptcy case, however, the issue is more complex. Because there is no in personam liability on the underlying debt, it could be argued that there is no unsecured claim after the § 506(a) valuation. If there is no unsecured claim, however, the debtor would be ineligible to use § 1322(b)(2) to avoid the lien. Therefore, lien avoidance is only statutorily permissible if § 506(a) is interpreted as "creating" an unsecured claim for the purposes of the Chapter 13 bankruptcy. As outlined below, this result is logically necessary, and case law, this district’s mandatory forms, and policy considerations all weigh in favor of the result.
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    ANALYSIS:
    
    The sole basis for Debtor’s objection to Claim 5 is that Claim 5 was the subject of (1) a prior discharge and (2) a lien avoidance order. To understand the legal argument made, a brief history of lien avoidance is necessary.1
    
    Prior to 1992, lien avoidance was available to debtors in both Chapter 7 and 13 proceedings, and for junior liens that were both wholly underwater and partially underwater. See e.g., Gaglia v. First Fed. Savs. & Loan Ass’n, 889 F.2d 1304 (3rd Cir. 1989) (Chapter 7 debtors could strip down partially underwater junior lien). In 1992, however, the Supreme Court decided Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U.S. 410 (1992), which held Chapter 7 debtors could not strip down a partially unsecured lien to the value of the collateral. In reaching conclusion, the Supreme Court noted the definition of secured claim in 11 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1), which states as follows:
    
    An allowed claim of a creditor secured by a lien on property in which the estate has an interest, or that is subject to setoff under section 553 of this title, is a secured claim to the extent of the value of such creditor’s interest in the estate’s interest in such property, or to the extent of the amount subject to setoff, as the case may be, and is an unsecured claim to the extent that the value of such creditor’s interest or the amount so subject to setoff is less than the amount of such allowed claim. Such value shall be determined in light of the purpose of the valuation and of the proposed disposition or use of such property, and in conjunction with any hearing on such disposition or use or on a plan affecting such creditor’s interest.
    
    The Supreme Court also noted the language of 11 U.S.C. § 506(d), which states, in relevant part: "To the extent that a lien secures a claim against the debtor that is not an allowed secured claim, such lien is void." Prior to Dewsnup, courts have interpreted §
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    506(a)(1) and § 506(d), when read in conjunction, to establish a method by which debtors could void a lien to the extent such a lien was wholly or partially unsecured. The Supreme Court, however, rejected that reading, deferring to the "pre-Code rule that liens pass through bankruptcy unaffected." Id. at 778. In rejecting such a reading, the Supreme Court foreclosed the possibility of using § 506 as an independent mechanism to avoid wholly or partially underwater liens. Nevertheless, the Eleventh Circuit continued to allow Chapter 7 debtors to strip off wholly underwater liens, noting that the Supreme Court in Dewsnup had decided on the facts of a partially underwater lien. See, e.g., In re McNeal, 735 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 2012).
    
    In 2015, however, the Supreme Court returned to the issue, and rejected the Eleventh Circuit’s approach, holding that Chapter 7 debtors could not avoid wholly underwater liens through the operation of § 506. While it is not exactly clear how § 506 could be applied differently depending on whether the lien is wholly or partially unsecured, the Supreme Court concisely reasserted that "Dewsnup defined the term ‘secured claim’ in § 506(d) to mean a claim supported by a security interest in property, regardless of whether the value of that property would be sufficient to cover the claim. . . .
    Dewsnup’s construction of ‘secured claim’ resolves the question presented here."
    
    Nevertheless, Chapter 13 debtors have a different mechanism by which they can avoid liens which are partially or wholly underwater: 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2), which states:
  2. Subject to subsections (a) and (c) of this section, the plan may –
  (2) modify the rights of holders of secured claims, other than a claim secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence, or of holders of unsecured claims, or leave unaffected the rights of holders of any class of claims
  
  Prior to 1993, bankruptcy courts had allowed Chapter 13 debtors to use the above
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  provision to avoid both wholly and partially underwater liens. In 1993, however, the Supreme Court decided Nobelman v. Am. Savs. Bank, 508 U.S. 324 (1993), which limited Chapter 13 debtors ability to use § 1322(b)(2) to avoid liens to only those circumstances where the junior lien was wholly underwater. Id. at 332 ("In other words, to give effect to § 506(a)’s valuation and bifurcation of secured claims through a Chapter 13 plan in the manner petitions proposed would require a modification of the rights of the holder of the security interest. Section 1322 (b)(2) prohibits such a modification where, as here, the lender’s claim is secured only by a lien on the debtor’s principal residence."). After Nobelman, Chapter 13 debtors were still permitted to use § 1322(b)(2) to avoid liens which were "secured" by their principal residence, if such lien was wholly underwater (and thus, pursuant to § 506(a)(1), not "secured"). See, e.g., In re Tanner, 217 F.3d 1357, 1359-60 (11th Cir. 2000).
  
  An additional wrinkle, however, is present when a debtor files a "Chapter 20" case.2 A Chapter 20 case involves a debtor who received a discharge in a Chapter 7 case and subsequently (technically within four years) files a Chapter 13 case. In that circumstance:
  
  The Chapter 7 discharge erases all dischargeable, unsecured debts. The discharge, however, only prevents creditors from collecting against the debtors personally. Any liens on secured property ride through the bankruptcy. The liens become non-recourse loans. When the debtor then files under Chapter 13 none of the unsecured debt is part of the Chapter 13 case because it has been discharged in the Chapter 7 case, but the remaining liens are claims in the Chapter 13.
  
  In re Winitzky, 2009 WL 9139891 at *1 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2009) (citations omitted). There are at least two significant questions that arise when a Chapter 13 debtor attempts to avoid a wholly underwater junior lien after obtaining a Chapter 7 discharge: (1) whether avoidance of the junior lien is permissible and (2) how the holder of the junior lien should be treated during the pendency of the Chapter 13 plan.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  Furthermore, there is an additional important question here: how much weight should the Court give the language of the lien avoidance motion and the subsequent order granting the motion.
  
  The two preliminary questions identified above are legally complex – although a brief description is adequate to reveal the issues. Under the Nobelman lien avoidance procedure, a debtor first seeks a valuation under § 506(a)(1). Pursuant to § 506(a)(1), the claim is secured "to the extent of the value of such creditor’s interest in the estate’s interest in such property," and is an "unsecured claim to the extent that the value of such creditor’s interest or the amount so subject setoff is less than the amount of such allowed claim."
  
  Here, because the entire claim is underwater, the application of § 506(a)(1) leads to a conclusion that the amount of the secured claim is zero. Pursuant to § 506(a)(1), the remainder of the claim is unsecured. The issue, however, is whether § 506(a)(1) presupposes that in personam liability exists on the claim in the first place. If § 506(a)
  (1) does not implicitly contain such a presumption, then the plain language of the statute reads that any part of the claim determined not to be secured is automatically unsecured. In effect, a Chapter 20 debtor would have a choice regarding wholly underwater junior liens: treat the claim as either wholly secured or wholly unsecured.
  
  If § 506(a)(1) does implicitly contain an assumption that, for an unsecured claim to remain, in personam liability must have existed on the claim in the first place, a different problem arises. As noted above, section 1322(b)(2) allows Chapter 13 debtors to "modify the rights of holders of secured claims, other than a claim secured only by a secured interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence, or of holders of unsecured claims." And Nobleman requires a two-step, sequential process for lien avoidance of wholly underwater junior liens by Chapter 13 debtors: (1) the application of § 506(a)(1), then (2) the operation of § 1322(b)(2). In order for § 1322(b)(2) to be applicable, however, and thus lien avoidance possible, the § 506(a)
  1. valuation must reach one of two results: (1) a secured claim, other than a claim
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    secured by real property that is the debtor’s principal residence; or (2) an unsecured claim. Clearly, if Claim 5 is secured, it is only secured by Debtor’s principal residence. Therefore, the only way § 1322(b)(2) can be applied is if the operation of § 506(a)(1) results in an unsecured claim. The result is logically unambiguous, and simply unavoidable.
    
    The Court’s form motion and order, as well as case law, implicitly and explicitly recognize this dilemma for debtors. The lien avoidance motion filed by Debtor included the following request: "Respondent’s claim on the junior position lien shall be allowed as a nonpriority general unsecured claim in the amount per the filed Proof of Claim." [Dkt. No. 21 at 3(d)(3)]. And, as noted in the introduction section, the Court’s order granting the motion contains the following: "The claim of the junior lienholder is to be treated as an unsecured claim and is to be paid through the plan pro rata with all other unsecured claims." [Dkt. No. 30 at 4(b)(4)].3
    
    The case law on this narrow issue (if lien stripping is allowed in a Chapter 20, how should the claim be treated during the plan) is not extensive. Multiple bankruptcy courts in California, however, have recognized the consequences noted above. The first opinion nationally to address the issue appears to have come from this district. See In re Akram, 239 B.R. 371, 377 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2001) ("However, neither Lam nor the cases from other Circuits addressed or allowed the result moved for here: that a Lam-stripped claim should be valued, for chapter 13 plan purposes, not only as a secured claim of zero, but also as a general unsecured claim of zero, where the debtor previously received a chapter 7 discharge. In fact, neither movant, nor this Court, found any reported case authorizing the result here moved for, or even ruling on this ‘Chapter 20’ twist to Lam motions."). The holding of that case was: "the ‘Lam- stripping" of these secured claims in the chapter 13 case resulted in valuing the secured claims at zero secured, for chapter 13 plan purposes, and turned the full amount owed to each creditor (pursuant to that creditor’s Note) into a general unsecured claim, for chapter 13 plan purposes." Id. at 378.
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    The reasoning of Akram does not appear to be universally accepted, however, it has been cited approvingly by the BAP and is the majority position on the issue. See In re Eaton, 2006 WL 6810924 at *6 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006); In re Gounder, 266 B.R. 879, 880 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2001) ("Given that the lien survived the chapter 7 discharge, if a chapter 13 petition is later filed and the lien is stripped pursuant to Lam, the creditor must be allowed an unsecured claim despite the earlier chapter 7 discharge."); see also In re Renz, 476 B.R. 382, 392 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2012). Even Okosis, the decision commonly referred to as detailing the "fourth option" which provided a rationale to validate lien stripping in Chapter 20 cases (see footnote 4), concluded that the claim must be treated as an unsecured claim in the plan. 451 B.R. 90, 96 (Bankr. D. Nev.
    2011) ("Even though the chapter 13 debtor faces no personal liability on the debt, the debtor may use Section 506(a) to determine that the claim is not supported by the value of any collateral, avoid the lien through the chapter 13 plan, and thereby treat the debt as unsecured debt.").
    
    Ultimately, the case law and this district’s form motion and order recognize the logical necessity that only one of two things can be true: (1) lien stripping is unavailable in Chapter 20 cases; or (2) the wholly underwater junior lien becomes an unsecured claim upon lien avoidance. Quite simply, the Chapter 20 debtor cannot have its cake and eat it too. Creditor’s claim, originally secured by property of the estate, is converted to an unsecured claim against the estate after lien avoidance.
    
    Not only do logical reasoning, case law, and this district’s practice demand the result, but the equities concur. A Chapter 13 debtor can propose plans which pay creditors three different categories of dividends: (1) 0%; (2) more than 0%, but less than 100%; or (3) 100%. In either of the first two cases, treatment of the claim as an unsecured claim would not affect the amount the debtor pays into the plan. Only in the situation where the debtor is not paying the entirety of its disposable income into the plan does the situation affect the debtor. In other words, only in those cases where the Chapter 13 debtor has the ability to pay some or the entire resulting unsecured claim would the result impact the Chapter 13 plan.4 Furthermore, there is no (other) mechanism under the bankruptcy code that would allow a debtor to avoid a lien and discharge the in
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    personam liability without the obligation to make a good faith effort to make payment on the claim. For all the reasons outlined above, Debtor’s efforts at finding a loophole to avoid the requirement are logically incompatible with the Code.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
    Movant(s):
    Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-17316
    
    Luis Fernando Montoya, Jr.
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #3.00 Application for Compensation with Notice of Motion and Proof of Service. for Anthony B Vigil, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 9/28/2017 to 11/8/2017, Fee:
    $2,215.00, Expenses: $. EH
    Docket 34
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/25/2018
    
    Application: $2,215
    
    Opposition: Trustee recommends $1,175
    
    Analysis: 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) (2005) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation.
    
    Counsel requests fees for the following:
    1. Opposition to a motion for relief from stay (Nissan) in which the result was an adequate protection. For this category, Counsel billed $2,120 and voluntarily reduced the amount to $1,500.
    2. Non-opposition to a motion for relief from stay (BMW). Counsel billed $640.
    3. Filing the fee application. Counsel billed $75.
  Trustee’s objection is primarily that the billing rate of $400/hr was too high for the tasks, which could mostly be characterized as clerical or administration. Trustee proposes a $750 reduction for opposing the relief from stay and a $290 reduction for the non-opposition to the motion for relief from stay.
  
  The Court agrees with Trustee that Counsel’s billing entries appear unreasonable. Regarding the first relief from stay, Counsel billing primarily reflects relaying the comments of Nissan to Debtor or relying the comments of Debtor to Nissan, and
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Luis Fernando Montoya, Jr.
  each e-mail is billed at $80 or $120. Furthermore, Counsel billed $320 for the opposition, which was a single paragraph long. Finally, the billing of $640 for services related to a non-opposition to BMW’s motion for relief from the
  
  Chapter 13
  automatic stay appears excessive and unnecessary. None of the services billed for involved legal issues of any complexity.
  
  Tentative:
  
  The Court is inclined to adopt Trustee’s recommendation and allow fees in the amount of $1,175.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Luis Fernando Montoya Jr. Represented By Anthony B Vigil
  Movant(s):
  Luis Fernando Montoya Jr. Represented By Anthony B Vigil Anthony B Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-18792
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Principal Residence with JPMorgan Chase Bank NA in the amount of $66,851.17
  
  From: 12/21/17 Also #5
  EH
  
  Docket 22
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  12/21/2017
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for a variety of reasons. First, the motion identifies the hearing time as "12:30 a.m.". Second, while the proof of services states "[c]ertified mail required for service on a national bank," Debtor has served national banks by regular mail. Third, Debtor has not served the secured creditors pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004. Finally, section 3 of the motion, which identifies the liens, states that the junior lien "is not to be avoided," meaning that the motion technically does not request any relief.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Movant(s):
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles Patricia A Mireles
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Patricia A Mireles Patricia A Mireles
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-18792
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/30/17, 12/21/17
  Also #4 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19377
  
  Sheryl Welsh
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/14/17
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sheryl Welsh Represented By
  Hayk Grigoryan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19400
  
  Beverley June Marshall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/21/17, 1/18/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Beverley June Marshall Represented By Arthur H Lampel
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19401
  
  Martin Leland Napier and Clasina Hendrika Napier
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/21/17
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Martin Leland Napier Represented By Aaron Lloyd
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Clasina Hendrika Napier Represented By Aaron Lloyd
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19614
  
  Alfredo Manzo Arrieta and Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Alfredo Manzo Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19628
  
  Alejandro Salinas, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 1/11/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Alejandro Salinas Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19765
  
  Danny Josefy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Danny Josefy Represented By Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19861
  
  Oscar Alvarez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Oscar Alvarez Represented By Daniel B Martinez
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-13746
  
  Ronald Andrew Lopez and Lisa Darlene Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/18/18
  EH
  
  Docket 156
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ronald Andrew Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Darlene Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-25336
  
  Enrique Artemio Barba
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 150
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Enrique Artemio Barba Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-16884
  
  Robert M Lopez and Ashley Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 58
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Robert M Lopez Represented By Anthony Wilaras
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ashley Lopez Represented By Anthony Wilaras
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-15522
  
  Scott Allan Oswald and Lisa Frances Oswald
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 78
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Scott Allan Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Frances Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-16972
  
  Joe Martinez, Jr. and Sandra Lynette Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/18/18
  EH
  
  Docket 40
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Joe Martinez Jr. Represented By David Lozano
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sandra Lynette Martinez Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-11323
  
  Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma E. Aguiar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 38
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Irma E. Aguiar Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-16235
  
  Matthew Thomas Harper and Robin Jean Harper
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 57
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 1/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Matthew Thomas Harper Represented By Norma Duenas
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Robin Jean Harper Represented By Norma Duenas
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-17911
  
  Elizabeth T Baker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 117
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elizabeth T Baker Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-20133
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 44
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-14189
  
  Gabriel Valencia, Jr. and Maricela Valencia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 37
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  1/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gabriel Valencia Jr. Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maricela Valencia Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-14359
  
  Lashanda Moniek Shelton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 37
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lashanda Moniek Shelton Represented By Lionel E Giron Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-16337
  
  Ty Nicholas Garner, Sr. and Diane Lynn Garner
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 20
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ty Nicholas Garner Sr. Represented By Richard E Chang
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Diane Lynn Garner Represented By Richard E Chang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-17609
  
  Danny Howard Weeks
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 24
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-10334
  
  Alberto H. Garcia and Gina Caceres
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43275 Corte Almeria, Temecula, CA 92592
  
  MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB
  
  From: 1/9/18 EH
  Docket 56
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alberto H. Garcia Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Gina Caceres Represented By
  Carey C Pickford
  Movant(s):
  Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
  Jennifer C Wong
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Alberto H. Garcia and Gina Caceres
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11831
  
  Gregory Dwight Vit
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 46048 Paseo Gallante, Temecula, CA 92592
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
  
  From: 11/28/17, 1/9/18, 1/23/18 EH
  
  Docket 33
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/28/2017
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to indicate whether arrears have been cured or alternatively, whether APO agreement has been reached.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gregory Dwight Vit Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Bank Of New York Mellon FKA The Represented By
  Erin M McCartney
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-13360
  
  Biani Berlenda Mora
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12648 Casa Bonita Place, Victorville, CA 92392
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE
  
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/18/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Biani Berlenda Mora Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
  Daniel K Fujimoto Caren J Castle
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-14023
  
  Yvonne L Sanchez and Oscar Sanchez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5202 El Sueno Street, San Antonio, TX 78233
  
  MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
  
  EH
  
  Docket 31
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/29/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Yvonne L Sanchez Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Oscar Sanchez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By Daniel K Fujimoto Caren J Castle
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19400
  
  Beverley June Marshall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: City of Chino CIVDS1506709
  
  MOVANT: LIWEI HU
  
  EH
  
  Docket 29
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Beverley June Marshall Represented By Arthur H Lampel
  Movant(s):
  Liwei Hu Represented By
  Katherine Hoffman
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19439
  
  Jason James Popken
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 CHEVROLET SILVERADO 2500, VIN 1GB2CUEGXHZ201932
  
  MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. DBA GM FINANCIAL
  
  EH
  
  Docket 14
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jason James Popken Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
  Movant(s):
  Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By
  Sheryl K Ith
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19771
  
  Patricia Anne Goffney
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2378 Savanna Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 13
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to ¶12 of the prayer for relief.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Patricia Anne Goffney Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10136
  
  Samuel Garcia and Claudia Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property 36848 Quasar Pl., Murrieta, CA 92563: 2011 Chevrolet Traverse; 2012 Chevrolet Silverado
  
  MOVANT: SAMUEL AND CLAUDIA GARCIA
  
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  
  Service is proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  The Debtors’ prior case was dismissed for failure to provide Trustee with 2016 tax returns. In the current case, Debtors have already provided 2016 returns to the Trustee. Moreover, the prior case demonstrates that the Debtors remained current for over one year. On these facts, the Debtors’ evidence of good faith is sufficient to warrant continuance of the automatic stay.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Samuel Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Claudia Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Samuel Garcia and Claudia Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  Samuel Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Claudia Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:13-25794
  
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #9.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Another Meridian Company LLC
  
  From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17
  
  Also #10 & #11 EH
  Docket 630
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
  James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
  2:00 PM
  6:13-25794
  
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #10.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Inland Machinery, Inc
  
  From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17
  
  Also #9 & #11 EH
  Docket 630
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
  James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
  2:00 PM
  6:13-25794
  
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #11.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re ASR Constructors Inc
  
  From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17
  
  Also #9 & #10 EH
  Docket 630
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
  James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:16-01279 Allied Injury Management, Inc. v. One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group
  
  #12.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01279. Complaint by Allied Injury Management, Inc. against One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group & Therapy, Inc., One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group, Inc., Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Group, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Account Stated; and (3) Unjust Enrichment Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 1/24/17, 3/7/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
  Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
  One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
  Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
  Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Represented By
  Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Plaintiff(s):
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:16-01225 Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC v. Allied Injury Management,
  
  #13.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC against Allied Injury Management, Inc., John C. Larson. 02 - Other e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
  
  From: 11/1/16, 12/6/16, 1/31/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 10/3/17, 11/28/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  John C. Larson Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Cambridge Medical Funding Group Represented By
  Kenneth Hennesay
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #14.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property of the Estate From: 10/24/17, 10/31/17, 11/28/17, 12/19/17
  Also #15 & #16 EH
  Docket 303
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  10/31/2017
  The hearing on the Motion is continued to November 28, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. as a holding date.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Movant(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Steven Werth
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #15.00 CONT First Omnibus Objection of Debtor-In-Possession Allied Injury Management, Inc. Seeking Disallowance of Certain Proofs of Claim (Holding Date)
  
  From: 11/8/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 3/7/17,4/4/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17
  
  Also #14 & #16 EH
  Docket 83
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Movant(s):
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #16.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 6/7/16, 8/30/16, 9/14/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 11/28/17
  
  Also #14 & #15 EH
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  6:17-19936
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #17.00 Motion to Approve Stipulation Between Auto Strap Transport, LLC and Commercial Credit Group, Inc., Secured Party for Adequate Protection
  
  EH
  
  Docket 76
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  
  Notice of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed. The Court, having reviewed the Stipulation of the parties and finding the terms to be reasonable under the circumstances, the Motion is GRANTED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #18.00 Objection to claim of Four Winds Holding Company LLC Also #19 & #20
  EH
  
  Docket 85
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  
  Notice of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed. The Court, having reviewed the Stipulation of the parties and finding the terms to be reasonable under the circumstances, the Motion is GRANTED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #19.00 Motion for Extension of Time to have Plan of Reorganization Confirmed Also #18 & #20
  EH
  
  Docket 91
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/30/2018
  BACKGROUND
  
  On August 25, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Rick’s Patio, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. In its chapter 11 petition, the Debtor designated itself as a small business debtor as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(51D).
  
  The Debtor filed its Chapter 11 Plan ("Plan") and Disclosure Statement ("DS") on December 26, 2017.
  
  On December 28, 2017, the Debtor filed its Motion for Extension of Time to have Plan of Reorganization Confirmed ("Motion"). Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  For a small business case, the plan and disclosure statement must be filed within 300
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  days after the order for relief in a small business case. 11 U.S.C. § 1121(e)(2). Based on the Petition Date of the instant case, the statutory deadline for the Debtor’s filing of a plan and disclosure statement in this case is June 21, 2018.
  
  Separately, the court shall confirm a plan that complies with the applicable provisions of this title and that is filed in accordance with section 1121(e) not later than 45 days after the plan is filed unless the time for confirmation is extended in accordance with section 1121(e)(3). 11 U.S.C. § 1129(e).
  
  Here, the Debtor filed its Chapter 11 Plan ("Plan") and Disclosure Statement ("DS") on December 26, 2017. Based on the filing date, the deadline to confirm the Debtor’s plan and disclosure statement is February 9, 2018.
  
  The Debtor now moves for an extension of the 45-day period to May 15, 2018. In order to allow for a two-step process which first allows a hearing on approval of the Debtor’s disclosure statement prior to a final hearing on confirmation, the Debtor must seek this extension. Currently, the Debtor’s Motion for approval of Chapter 11 disclosure statement is set for hearing on February 13, 2018.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing facts, and in order to permit the Debtor to obtain approval of its Plan and DS with adequate notice to creditors, the Court finds the requested extension is warranted.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  
  Party Information
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #20.00 Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement Also #18 & #19
  EH
  
  Docket 82
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/13/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  11:00 AM
  6:11-33601
  
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 Chapter 7 Trustees Motion for Order (1) Approving Compromise of Products Liability Action, (2) Authorizing Employment of Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP As Co-Special Counsel And Payment of Compensation to Co-Special Counsel; and (3) Granting Related Relief Including Disbursements From the Settlement Payment; Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Declarations of Lynda T. Bui, Thom
  E. Smith and Amy Eskin in Support EH
  Docket 30
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On July 21, 2011, John & Carolyn Vega ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On November 2, 2011, Debtors received a discharge and five days later the case was closed.
  
  On March 1, 2017, UST filed a motion to reopen the case to investigate and administer litigation settlement proceeds. On December 12, 2017, the Chapter 7 trustee filed two motions to approve compromise. The first motion, between the estate and the debtors and primarily relating to the amount of Debtors’ exemption in the proceeds, was granted on January 5, 2018. The second motion was set for hearing and is under consideration now.
  
  Pursuant to the instant compromise motion the Trustee requests: (1) approval of the
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  
  Chapter 7
  compromise of the products liability action; (2) authorization to employ Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP as co-special counsel and payment of their compensation; and (3) related relief, including approval of the settlement payment disbursements. No opposition to the instant compromise motion has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019(a) states: "On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct." The Court may grant approval if it determines that the compromise is "fair and equitable." See In re Berkeley Delaware Court, LLC, 834 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2016). In determining whether the compromise is fair and equitable, the Court applies a four-factor test. See In re DiCostanzo, 399 Fed. Appx. 307, 308 (9th Cir. 2010). The test was originally outlined in In re A & C Props., and provides for consideration of
  
  (a) The probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it;
  (d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.
  784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986) (quotation omitted). "The bankruptcy court has great latitude in approving compromise agreements." In re Woodson, 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). Typically, "a compromise should be approved unless it falls below the lowest point in the range of reasonableness." In re Art & Architecture Books of the 21st Century, 2016 WL 1118742 at *25 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016) (quotation omitted).
  
  The proposed settlement here, however, presents a unique situation. The proposed settlement represents an "aggregate settlement" negotiated in the context of, presumably, state or federal district court litigation. The proposed settlement has not been disclosed to the Court on the basis that it contains a confidentiality provision. The Court will not approve settlement terms without the opportunity to review those terms. Furthermore, Trustee motions lacks detail in its description of the situation.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  
  Chapter 7
  The nature, extent and value of Debtor’s claim are completely unknown to this Court. The factual situation giving rise to Debtor’s claim is unclear, and the Court lacks any ability to estimate the value of the claim. Furthermore, as a result of the absence of information, the Court lacks the information necessary to determine the reasonableness of the requested attorney’s fees.
  
  The Bankruptcy Code demonstrates a preference for public access to the proceedings. See 11 U.S.C. § 107 (2010). There are procedures by which certain documents, including settlements, can be classified as confidential. See, e.g., In re Oldco M Corp., 466 B.R. 234 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012); In re Hemple, 295 B.R. 200 (Bankr. D. Vt.
  2003). In order for the Court to apply the legal standards of 11 U.S.C. § 107, the Court must be given an opportunity to review the material and make a determination regarding whether the matter is entitled to confidentiality. The Court will not, however, approve a settlement and classify it as confidential without knowledge of the terms of the settlement.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion or CONTINUE the matter for supplemental evidence and analysis.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John Vega Represented By
  Jenny L Doling
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carolyn Vega Represented By Jenny L Doling
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  
  Chapter 7
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-10720
  
  Hiep Huu Phan
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) - No Fee Right, Title, and Interest in Real Property; Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving payment of Commissions; and (4) Finding purchaser is a Good Faith Purchaser
  
  EH
  
  Docket 52
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On January 30, 2017, Hiep Huu Phan ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Schedule A listed certain real property located at 3073 Coventry St., Corona, CA 92879 (the "Property"). On May 4, 2017, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Pagter & Misty Perry Isaacson as counsel. On June 26, 2017, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Richard Halderman Jr. as realtor.
  
  On November 10, 2017, Trustee filed a motion for sale of property of the estate under Section 363(b). On November 22, 2017, Debtor’s non-filing spouse, Man Thi Nguyen ("Nguyen") filed her opposition. Prior to the hearing on December 6, 2017, the Court posted a tentative ruling indicating that it intended to deny the motion for failure to comply with §363(h). At the hearing, the Trustee withdrew the motion.
  
  On January 9, 2018, the Trustee filed a new motion for sale of property of the estate. On January 16, 2018, Nguyen filed her opposition.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Hiep Huu Phan
  
  Chapter 7
  DISCUSSION
  
  The previous tentative ruling of this Court stated that in order for Trustee to sell the Property free of the non-filing spouse’s joint tenancy interest, Trustee must demonstrate compliance with § 363(h). In the instant motion, Trustee has added a new sub-section indicating that while the Property is held by Debtor and Nguyen as joint tenants, Trustee believes the Property is really community property. In support of Trustee’s characterization, Trustee states: "Notwithstanding the fact that the Property is held by Debtor and Nguyen as joint tenants, California law provides that the community property presumption applies to property acquired during a marriage unless it is (1) traceable to a separate property source; (2) acquired by gift or bequest; or (3) earned or accumulated while the spouses are living separate and apart."
  
  The Court agrees with Trustee that if the community property presumption is applicable, then no evidence has been presented to the Court to rebut the presumption. Trustee, however, has not provided any evidence or information to support his assertion that the community property presumption is applicable. Specifically, the Court has no evidence regarding when the Property was acquired or when Debtor and Nguyen were married. In the absence of any evidence establishing that the community property presumption is applicable, the Court concludes that Trustee has still failed to comply with § 363(h).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion or CONTINUE the matter for supplemental evidence and analysis.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Hiep Huu Phan
  
  Chapter 7
  Hiep Huu Phan Represented By Toby T Tran
  Movant(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By
  Misty A Perry Isaacson
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By
  Misty A Perry Isaacson
  11:00 AM
  6:17-10724
  
  Bausman and Company Incorporated
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 CONT Application Second Interim (6/27/17-9/27/17) and Final Application of Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP for Allowance and Payment of Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses as General Dip Counsel
  
  From: 1/10/18 EH
  Docket 146
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/18
  
  Analysis:
  
  As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that Local Rule 2016-(1)(a)(2)(A) imposes certain notice requirements when more than one professional is employed. Here, in addition to Applicant, the Court approved the employment application of Trustee’s counsel, Best Best & Krieger, on December 1, 2017. Nevertheless, Applicant did not comply with the more stringent notice requirements applicable to interim fee applications when multiple professionals are employed.
  
  Furthermore, the Court notes that the current status of this fee application is somewhat unclear. Applicant and Trustee filed a stipulation regarding the fee application on December 29, 2017, which was approved by the Court on January 4, 2018. The stipulation states the following:
  1. The Application shall be treated as an interim application only at this time;
  2. PCHS [Applicant] shall seek final allowance and payment of compensation and reimbursement of expenses at the conclusion of the case; and
  3. PCHS [Applicant] shall not be required to re-file the Application with the Court to request final allowance and payment of compensation and reimbursement of expenses. At the conclusion of the case, PCHS shall file a
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Bausman and Company Incorporated
  declaration requesting that the Application be treated as a final application.
  
  Pursuant to the above stipulation, it appears that the Court is only being asked to approve the instant application and allow fees on an interim basis, and the Applicant does not appear to be seeking payment until the conclusion of the case. In other words, the instant application is only seeking temporary approval of fees, with final approval and payment to occur at a later date.
  
  In the Court’s order approving the stipulation, the Court vacated the hearing, originally set for January 10, 2018. Four days later, however, the Court entered a second order continuing the hearing to January 31, 2018.
  
  Regarding the merits, 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) (2005) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. Here, the Court is especially concerned with § 330(a)(3)(C): "whether the services were necessary to the administration of, or beneficial at the time at which the service was rendered."
  
  Chapter 7
  
  The Court’s first concern relates to the conversion motion. The Central District of California has a mandatory form motion to be used when converting cases from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7 (F 1017-1.1.Motion.Debtor.Convert). Debtor did not use the mandatory motion, however, instead electing to draft its own motion under an inappropriate legal provision, § 1112(b). As reflected in the Court’s tentative ruling on September 19, 2017, the Court disregarded Debtor’s choice to invoke an inappropriate legal provision, simply noting that under § 1112(a) Debtor was entitled to convert the case as of right. Furthermore, under Local Rule 1017-1(a) (3), there was no need to set the matter for hearing. Ultimately, Debtor could have quickly filled out the form mandatory form motion and set the matter on negative notice. The decision to ignore the procedure outlined in the Local Rules resulted in excessive billing. The Court is inclined to disallow the 3.3 hours (at $525/hr) that appear to be directly related to the filing and preparation of the conversion motion, resulting in a reduction of $1,732.50.
  
  The Court’s second concern relates to Applicant’s first fee application hearing. Applicant is not entitled to bill for defending its fee application. There appear to be 1.7 hours (at $525/hr) billed for review and preparation of defense of
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Bausman and Company Incorporated
  Applicant’s first fee application. The Court is inclined to disallow this time, resulting in a reduction of $892.50. Furthermore, the Court notes that the only substantive discussion which occurred at the September 19th hearing concerned Applicant’s fee application. While the Court did hold a hearing on Applicant’s conversion motion, such a hearing was unnecessary and would not have occurred had Applicant abided by the Local Rules. Therefore, the Court is inclined to disallow the 4.8 hours (at $525/hr) of travel time incurred by Applicant in connection with this hearing, resulting in a reduction of $2,520.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Finally, the Court is also concerned with the work that occurred after Applicant became aware that Debtor would convert to Chapter 7, but before such conversion occurred. Specifically, the Court notes that Applicant intentionally delayed conversion to Chapter 7 by approximately two months, apparently in an attempt to work out a sale of certain property prior to conversion. Such a sale, however, did not occur and Applicant never filed a sale motion. As a result, the Court will disallow the 1.3 hours (at $525/hr) billed for preparation of the sale motion, which appears to have been unnecessarily premature, resulting in a reduction of $682.50
  
  The sum of the above reductions is $5,827.50. The Court is inclined to allow fees in the reduced amount of $13,672.50 and allow expenses in the full amount of
  $115.27.
  
  Tentative:
  
  The Court is inclined to allow fees in the reduced amount of $13,674.50, and disallow fees in excess of that amount without prejudice, and allow expenses in the full amount of $115.27.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED, or Applicant may not appear and will be deemed to submit to the tentative.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
  William A Smelko
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Bausman and Company Incorporated
  
  Chapter 7
  Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
  William A Smelko
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Best Best & Krieger Caroline Djang
  11:00 AM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Motion for Turnover of Property EH
  Docket 74
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  11:00 AM
  6:17-17959
  
  Oswaldo Yanez Canton and Alex Sanchez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 Stipulation By Merchants Acquisition Group, LLC and the Debtors to Extend Time for Filing Complaint to Determine Debt to Be Non-Dischargeable and to Extend Time for Filing Reaffirmation Agreements
  
  EH
  
  Docket 24
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On September 22, 2017, Oswaldo Canton & Alex Sanchez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. The meeting of creditors was originally scheduled for October 26, 2017. On December 1, 2017, Daniel’s Jewelers ("Creditor") filed a motion for 2004 examination, and the motion was granted on December 11, 2017.
  
  On December 20, 2017, Debtors and Creditor filed a stipulation to extend time for filing complaint to determine debt to be non-dischargeable and to extend the time for filing reaffirmation agreements. The order lodged with the Court contained the following two rulings:
  1. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time for Merchants Acquisition Group LLC to file a complaint under any subsection of 11 U.S.C. § 523 and for entering into and filing reaffirmation agreement with the above-named Debtor(s), is extended to an including the date of 03/05/2018.
  2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any discharge of the Debtor(s) in this case
    11:00 AM
    CONT... Oswaldo Yanez Canton and Alex Sanchez Chapter 7
    shall not apply to this creditor until after the expiration of the above extension
    of time, and if said complaint is filed, until after a final order disposing of said complaint is entered.
    
    On January 5, 2018, the stipulation was set for hearing.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    Regarding the first component of the proposed order, the extension of the reaffirmation deadline and the deadline to file a non-dischargeability complaint, the Court finds the requests to be legally permissible and sufficient grounds established. Here, the deadline to file a reaffirmation agreement and a non-dischargeability complaint was December 26, 2017. FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4008(a) allows the Court to extend the reaffirmation deadline in its discretion. FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4007(c) allows the Court to extend the deadline to file a non-dischargeability complaint for cause. For the reasons set forth in the stipulations, and in light of the fact that Debtors have agreed to the extensions, the Court finds it appropriate to extend both deadlines to March 5, 2018.
    
    The second component of the request, however, cannot be approved. It appears Creditor has requested that its claim be temporarily (and possibly indefinitely) classified as non-dischargeable. There does not appear to be any legal basis or precedent for such a request. A creditor bears the burden of establishing that its claim falls within the exceptions to discharge outlined in 11 U.S.C. § 523. And the Bankruptcy Code expressly disfavors and restricts a debtor’s ability to waive the discharge of particular debts. For example, § 524(a) explicitly states that a discharge is effective "whether or not discharge of such debt is waived." Additionally, § 524(c), governing reaffirmation agreements, imposes strict requirements on when a debt can be exempted from discharge. If a creditor and debtor could simply stipulate that a discharge not apply to a particular debt, then the entire concept of reaffirmation agreement would be unnecessary. Therefore, this second component of the proposed order will not be approved.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Oswaldo Yanez Canton and Alex Sanchez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent it seeks an extension of the deadline to file a reaffirmation agreement and a non-dischargeability complaint and DENY the motion to the extent it seeks to classify a debt as non-dischargeable by stipulation.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Oswaldo Yanez Canton Represented By Frank X Ruggier
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Alex Sanchez Represented By Frank X Ruggier
    Movant(s):
    Merchants Acquisition Group, LLC Represented By
    Richard W Snyder
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:16-11635
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al
    
    #6.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Amended Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason; 68- Dischargeability - 523(a)(6) Willful and Malicious Injury
    
    From: 11/2/16, 1/4/17, 3/1/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17 EH
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/7/18 AT 2:00 PM
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Defendant(s):
    Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Plaintiff(s):
    Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
    2:00 PM
    6:16-13096
    
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01219 Candee et al v. Ayoub et al
    
    #7.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Keith H Candee, Original Thurber Ranch LLC against Tarek El Sayed Ayoub, Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub
    
    From: 11/1/16, 6/7/17, 1/24/18 EH
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Defendant(s):
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Gabriela Villeda Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy
    Plaintiff(s):
    Keith H Candee Represented By Jon H Lieberg
    Original Thurber Ranch LLC Represented By Jon H Lieberg
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Tarek El Sayed Ayoub
    
    Chapter 7
    Wesley H Avery (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons
    2:00 PM
    6:16-15419
    
    Francisco Javier Castillo
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01310 Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital v. Castillo
    
    #8.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01310. Complaint by Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital against Francisco Javier Castillo (willful and malicious injury)
    
    From: 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 11/8/17 EH
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Francisco Javier Castillo Represented By Joseph M Tosti
    Defendant(s):
    Francisco Javier Castillo Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Represented By
    Lazaro E Fernandez
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:16-16191
    
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01028 Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Tanaka et al
    
    #9.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01028. Complaint by Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee against Ronald Howard Tanaka, Carolyn Naomi Tanaka, Ryan Satoshi Tanaka, Leora Linda Tanaka, Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Probate Estate. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Sale of Real Property Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h); and (2) Turnover of Property of the Estate Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 542 (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property))
    
    From: 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 8/2/17, 1/24/18 EH
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/31/2018
    
    The status conference will be continued to March 21, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
    Defendant(s):
    Ronald Howard Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
    Carolyn Naomi Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sheri Tanaka Christopher
    
    Chapter 7
    Ryan Satoshi Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
    Leora Linda Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
    Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Represented By
    David L Prince
    Plaintiff(s):
    Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
    Monserrat Morales
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monserrat Morales
    2:00 PM
    6:14-16813
    
    M. A. Tabor
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01128 Frealy v. Trotochau et al
    
    #10.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01128. Complaint by Todd A. Frealy against Robin Sherrie Trotochau, Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). - Complaint: (1) For Breach Of Contract; (2) For Common Counts; (3) To Avoid And Recover Fraudulent Transfers; And (4) To Preserve Recovered Transfers For Benefit Of Debtor's Estate (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy)
    (Stip Judgment with Robin Trotochau 12/4/17)
    
    From: 7/20/16, 9/28/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 8/23/17, 9/27/17
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/31/2018
    
    The status conference will be continued to March 21, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    M. A. Tabor Represented By
    Judith Runyon
    Defendant(s):
    Robin Sherrie Trotochau Pro Se
    Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc. Represented By
    Leib M Lerner
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    M. A. Tabor
    
    Chapter 7
    Plaintiff(s):
    Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith
    2:00 PM
    6:13-27611
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns
    
    #11.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding re First Amended Complaint From: 8/2/17, 8/23/17, 11/8/17
    Also #12 EH
    Docket 36
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/31/18
    BACKGROUND
    On June 23, 2016, Revere Financial Corporation ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Don Burns ("Defendant"), and, on June 30, 2016, the complaint was amended. After Defendant failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint, the clerk entered default against Defendant on November 16, 2016.
    On April 21, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. On May 4, 2017, Defendant filed a motion to set aside default and an answer. On May 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed its opposition to the motion to set aside default. At a hearing on June 7, 2017, the Court instructed the parties that it would conditionally grant the motion to set aside default upon payment of reasonable costs, and requested further briefing regarding Plaintiff’s costs incurred as a result of Defendant’s delay. At a continued hearing on July 12, 2017, after the Court posted a tentative ruling reducing the fees requested by Plaintiff, the Court continued the motion to set aside default to allow further briefing from parties. On September 13, 2017, after further briefing, the Court entered an order setting aside default conditioned on payment by Defendant to
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Douglas Jay Roger
    Chapter 7
    Plaintiff in the amount of $4,593.75, to be paid within thirty days.
    
    The instant motion to dismiss, in addition to a status conference, came up for hearing on November 8, 2017. At the time of the hearing, however, Defendant had failed to file a declaration establishing that he had paid the ordered fees and, as a result, Defendant remained in default. The day after the hearing, Defendant filed a declaration establishing payment of the $4,593.75 to Plaintiff. That same day, the Court sanctioned Defendant an additional $500 for failing to timely comply with the Court’s order. The Court notes that it is unclear whether Defendant has complied with the sanctions order.
    
    On June 30, 2017, while still in default, Defendant filed the instant motion to dismiss. On August 9, 2017, Plaintiff filed their opposition to the motion to dismiss. On August 16, 2017, Defendant filed a reply.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    Defendant’s motion to dismiss argues that the amended complaint does not contain sufficient facts to satisfy the pleading standard of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 8, and the heightened pleading standard of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b). Defendant further argues that the fourth through tenth claims depend on liability in the first three claims, and should be dismissed if the first three claims are dismissed. Finally, Defendant argues that amending the complaint is futile.
    
    FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b) states: "In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person’s mind may be alleged generally." This heightened pleading standard is commonly interpreted as requiring the "who, what, where, when, and how." See, e.g., U.S. ex rel. Costner v. U.S., 317 F.3d 883, 888 (8th Cir. 2003).
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Here, the amended complaint contains detailed allegations documenting the date and amount of each transfer Plaintiff wishes to avoid. Specifically, in ¶ 19 Plaintiff references the details of the "Patent Assignment" and the "Royalty Assignment," and in the exhibit to the complaint the Plaintiff references the date, payor, and amount of an additional nineteen transactions. Because Defendant has merely recited the applicable legal standard without applying it the complaint at issue, it is unclear in what respect Defendant believes the complaint to be deficient. Nevertheless, the Court concludes that the first amended complaint sufficiently apprises Defendant of the details of Plaintiff’s complaint to satisfy the FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 8 pleading standard, and pleads fraud with sufficient particularity to satisfy the FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9 pleading standard.
    
    Because the Court has concluded that the first three claims for relief contain sufficient factual allegations, Defendant’s contingent request for dismissal of claims four through ten is denied.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    8/23/17
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    BACKGROUND
    
    On June 23, 2016, Revere Financial Corporation ("Revere") filed a complaint against Don Burns ("Burns"), and, on June 30, 2016, the complaint was amended. After Burns failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint, the clerk entered default against Burns on November 16, 2016.
    
    On April 21, 2017, Revere filed a motion for default judgment. On May 4, 2017, Burns filed a motion to set aside default and an answer. On May 24, 2017, Revere filed its opposition to the motion to set aside default. At a hearing on June 7, 2017, the Court instructed the parties that it would conditionally grant the motion to set aside default upon payment of reasonable costs, and requested further briefing regarding Revere’s costs incurred as a result of Burns’s delay. At a continued hearing on July 12, 2017, after the Court posted a tentative ruling reducing the fees requested by Revere, the Court continued the motion to set aside default to allow further briefing from parties. The fee dispute has not yet been resolve and no order has been entered related to the motion to set aside default.
    
    On June 30, 2017, Burns filed a motion to dismiss. On August 9, 2017, Revere filed their opposition to the motion to dismiss.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    Despite the fact that Burns is still in default, neither party has briefed the impact of that status on Burns’s motion to dismiss. A legal scholar previous wrote that "the defaulting party loses his standing to contest the truth of all facts that are ‘well- pleaded’ in the non-defaulting party’s complaint." Peter H. Bresnan & James P. Cornelio, Relief from Default Judgments Under Rule 60(b) – A Study of Federal Case Law, 49 FORDHAM L. REV. 956, 959-60 (1981) (collecting cases); see also Thomson v. Wooster, 114 U.S. 104, 112-14 (1885) ("From the authorities cited, and the express language of our own rules in equity, it seems clear that the defendants, after the entry
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    of the decree pro confesso, and while it stood unrevoked, were absolutely barred and precluded from alleging anything in derogation of, or in opposition to, the said decree, and that they are equally barred, and precluded from questioning its correctness here on appeal, unless on the face of the bill it appears manifest that it was erroneous and improperly granted."). Burns’s motion to dismiss raises a legal argument, however, not a factual argument.
    
    Courts appear willing to simultaneously grant motions to set aside default and dismiss the case. See, e.g., Mineo Yoshida v. Daikokuya Co., Ltd., 2008 WL 11338257 (C.D. Cal. 2007). Other courts have been more specific with regard to the order in which the motion to set aside default and the motion to dismiss must be considered. See Everest Indem. Ins. Co. v. Demarco, 2013 WL 12136578 at *2 (C.D. Cal. 2013) ("Before the Court can consider their motion to dismiss, the default must be set aside pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55(c)."). Where, as is the case here, the Court has merely orally indicated that it will set aside default upon the occurrence of a condition which has not yet been defined, and may or may not come to pass, the Court considers it improper to rule on the motion to dismiss. Therefore, the Court will continue the matter for Burns to obtain a setting aside of the default.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for fee payment, if any, to be made, and an order to be entered setting aside the default.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    Defendant(s):
    Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
    Movant(s):
    Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns Don C Burns
    Plaintiff(s):
    Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
    Trustee(s):
    Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
    Franklin R Fraley Jr
    2:00 PM
    6:13-27611
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns
    
    #12.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01163. Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation against Don C. Burns. (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)
    
    From: 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 8/2/17, 8/23/17, 11/8/17
    
    Also #11 EH
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
    Defendant(s):
    Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
    Plaintiff(s):
    Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
    Trustee(s):
    Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Carmela Pagay Franklin R Fraley Jr
    
    Chapter 7
    2:00 PM
    6:17-16272
    
    Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01191 Frealy v. Cebadas et al
    
    #13.00 Motion for Default Judgment Against Armando Cabadas, Jose Alfredo Cabadas, Victor Armando Cabadas Soto, and Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
    
    Also #14 EH
    Docket 24
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/31/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On October 15, 2015, Martha Loreno Soto Jimenez ("Debtor") and her (ex)husband acquired certain real property located at 1475 Capri Ln., San Jacinto, CA 92583 (the "Property"). On July 20, 2016, a divorce judgment provided that the Property was the separate property of Debtor. On June 22, 2017, Debtor and her (ex)husband transferred the Property to their sons via grant deed. The grant deed states: "This is a bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return.
    
    On July 27, 2017, Debtor filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On September 8, 2017, Trustee filed a complaint for: (1) declaratory relief; (2) avoidance of voidable transfer;
  3. recovery of avoided transfer; (4) sale of interest of co-owner in property of the estate; and (5) turnover of property against Armando Cebadas (Debtor’s husband or ex-husband), Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto (Debtor’s son), Victor Armando Cebadas Soto (Debtor’s son), and Debtor (collectively, "Defendants"). On October 17, 2017, the clerk entered default against Defendants. On January 10, 2018, Trustee filed a
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  motion for default judgment.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Entry of Default
    
    FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
  2. Motion for Default Judgment
    1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
      1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
        
        Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
        a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
        
        Chapter 7
        
        Here, Trustee served Defendants at the Property. It is unclear, however, whether the property is the "dwelling house or usual place of abode" for Debtor’s (ex)husband and two children. The Court requires additional evidence to establish that the Defendants (other than Debtor) were served in accordance with the requirements of FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1).
    2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
      
      Assuming Trustee establishing that service was proper, the Court will address the merits of the motion. Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").
      
      Here, the complaint includes nine causes of action: (1) declaratory relief; (2) five separate causes of action for avoidance of voidable transfer; (3) recovery of avoided transfer; (4) sale of interest of co-owner in property of the estate; and (5) turnover of property
      
      Regarding the first cause of action, declaratory relief, the complaint requests a determination that the Property is the community property of Debtor and her ex- husband. Trustee alleges in the complaint that Debtor and Armando acquired their interest in the Property prior to the petition date, while they were married. While this
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      
      Chapter 7
      appears true, Trustee has provided additional information in the motion for default judgment, namely a divorce judgment, which indicates that the property is actually the separate property of Debtor. This creates a dilemma because, upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint are to be taken as true. Furthermore, Trustee cannot ask for relief (i.e. a declaration that the Property is Debtor’s separate property) which goes beyond the scope of the relief requested in the complaint. Therefore, the Court cannot grant Trustee’s request for a determination that the Property is separate property. The Court also cannot grant Trustee’s request for a determination that the Property is community property because Trustee has submitted evidence establishing that the Property is in fact not community property.
      
      Regarding the second through sixth causes of action, avoidance of voidable transfer, Trustee has cited three Code provisions authorizing avoidance of the transfer of the Property to Debtor’s sons: §544(b) (with reference to CAL. CIV. CODE § 3439.04(a) (1)&(2), §3439.05, and § 3439.07), § 548(a)(1)(A), and § 548(a)(1)(B). The first
      cause of action for avoidable transfer cites 11 U.S.C. §§ 544(b) and 550(a) and CAL. CODE CIV. P. §§ 3439.04(a)(1) and 3439.07. Section 544(b) states that a trustee may avoid a transfer of an interest of the debtor that is voidable under applicable law. CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 3439.04(a)(1) states that a debtor’s transfer of an interest in property is voidable if the transfer was made "[w]ith actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud" creditors. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that the transfer was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors. 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) is materially identical to CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 3439.04(a)(1) so Trustee has also satisfied the former.
      
      CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 3439.04(a)(2) provides that a transfer is voidable if the debtor does not receive reasonable equivalent value and either (a) was engaged or about to engage in a transaction for which its remaining assets were unreasonable small or (b) or believed or reasonably should have believed it would incur debts beyond the debtor’s ability to pay. While the grant deed indicates it was a bona fide gift, and thus no reasonably equivalent value was received, Trustee has not provided sufficient factual allegations to satisfy the latter component of the test. Specifically, there is no factual allegation which supports the contention that Debtor’s assets were unreasonably small
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      
      Chapter 7
      for future transactions or that Debtor was about to incur debts beyond the debtor’s ability to pay. 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) is materially identical to CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 3439.04(a)(2) so the analysis is the same regarding the former.
      
      CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 3439.05 provides that a transfer is voidable as to a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer if the debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value and the debtor was or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value, that Debtor was insolvent as a result of the transfer and that there is a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer.
      
      Regarding recovery of the avoidable transfer, 11 U.S.C. § 550 provides that transfers avoided under §§ 544 and 548 are recoverable from the initial transferee. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that Debtor’s two sons, named defendants, are the initial transferees, and, therefore Trustee has satisfied § 550.
      
      Regarding Trustee’s request to sell an interest of a co-owner of property under § 363(h), the Court is inclined to conclude that Trustee’s complaint sufficiently establishes the four statutory requirements.
      
      Finally, regarding Trustee’s request for turnover, Section 542(a) provides for turnover of property of the estate that is of consequential value. Here, Trustee has sufficiently satisfied the requirements of § 542(a) by demonstrating that the Property is property of the estate and that the Property is not of inconsequential value.
    3. Amount of Damages
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Here, Trustee is not requesting any damages, and, therefore, no evidence is required establishing the amount of damages.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Conditioned on Trustee establishing that service on Defendants was proper, the Court is inclined to issue judgment in favor of the Trustee on the second, fourth, fifth, seventh, eight, and ninth claims for relief. The motion for default judgment is denied without prejudice as to the third and sixth claims for relief. The motion for default judgment is denied with prejudice as to the first claim for relief, although to the extent necessary Trustee is free to amend the complaint as to the first claim for relief.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Represented By Marlin Branstetter
  Defendant(s):
  Armando Cebadas Pro Se
  Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Victor Armando Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  6:17-16272
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01191 Frealy v. Cebadas et al
  
  #14.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01191. Complaint by Todd A. Frealy against Armando Cebadas, Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto, Victor Armando Cebadas Soto, Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)
  
  Also #13 From: 11/8/17 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Represented By Marlin Branstetter
  Defendant(s):
  Armando Cebadas Pro Se
  Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Victor Armando Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  6:13-29922
  
  Nancy Ann Howell
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell
  
  #15.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment
  (Holding Date)
  
  From: 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17, 1/24/18
  
  Also #16 EH
  Docket 62
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
  Andrew S Bisom
  Plaintiff(s):
  Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
  Andrew S Bisom
  Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Nancy Ann Howell
  
  Chapter 7
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:13-29922
  
  Nancy Ann Howell
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell
  
  #16.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01070. Complaint by Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom, Eisenberg Law Firm, APC against Nancy Ann Howell. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))
  
  From: 5/14/14, 7/2/14, 12/10/14, 3/18/15, 4/22/15, 5/20/15, 7/22/15, 10/28/15, 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17, 1/24/18
  
  Also #15 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
  Andrew S Bisom
  Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-20260
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al
  
  #1.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc., against Javier Lopez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
  
  From: 5/11/17, 6/22/17, 8/17/17, 10/19/17, 11/9/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Debtor(s):
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/22/18 AT 12:30 P.M. - ANOTHER SUMMONS ISSUED
  Party Information
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Defendant(s):
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Carmen Lopez Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Plaintiff(s):
  Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By
  Eamon Jafari
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19614
  
  Alfredo Manzo Arrieta and Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 1/25/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alfredo Manzo Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Mayte Hernandez- Arrieta Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20019
  
  Frank Prouty
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Real Time Resolutions EH
  Docket 21
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/30/18
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Frank Prouty Represented By
  Nima S Vokshori
  Movant(s):
  Frank Prouty Represented By
  Nima S Vokshori Nima S Vokshori Nima S Vokshori
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-21894
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 142
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-10795
  Agnes Smith
  Chapter 13
  #5.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 85
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/29/18
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Agnes Smith Represented By
  James T Lillard
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-12404
  Anthony E Turkson
  Chapter 13
  #6.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 88
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-15831
  William R Parker and Cheryl Parker
  Chapter 13
  #7.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 81
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William R Parker Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Cheryl Parker Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-19812
  Miguel Vivar and Maria Vivar
  Chapter 13
  #8.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 55
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Miguel Vivar Represented By
  Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Vivar Represented By
  Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-12191
  
  Valicia LaShawn Fennell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/18/18
  EH
  
  Docket 56
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Valicia LaShawn Fennell Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-19656
  
  Jerome D Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 54
  Debtor(s):
  *** VACATED *** REASON: TO BE HEARD ON 2/15/18 AT 12:30 P.M.
  Party Information
  Jerome D Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-21181
  Luis Fernando Buenrostro
  Chapter 13
  #11.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/18/18
  EH
  Docket 46
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Luis Fernando Buenrostro Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-13063
  Ethel N Odimegwu
  Chapter 13
  #12.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 53
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-14187
  Andre J Booker and Carrie L Booker
  Chapter 13
  #13.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/11/18
  EH
  Docket 27
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Andre J Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carrie L Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-14359
  Lashanda Moniek Shelton
  Chapter 13
  #14.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/25/18
  EH
  Docket 37
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Lashanda Moniek Shelton Represented By Lionel E Giron Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-16439
  Oscar Avila
  Chapter 13
  #15.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 31
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Oscar Avila Represented By
  Sanaz S Bereliani
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-16455
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason
  Chapter 13
  #16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 43
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-16683
  Salvador Caridad Rodriguez
  Chapter 13
  #17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 28
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/31/18
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Salvador Caridad Rodriguez Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-16873
  Brenda Morgan
  Chapter 13
  #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 40
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/29/18
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Brenda Morgan Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-12404
  Anthony E Turkson
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12016 Quantico Dr, Riverside, CA 92505
  
  MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
  
  From: 1/9/18 EH
  Docket 89
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Movant(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By April Harriott Keith Labell Sean C Ferry
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Anthony E Turkson
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14108
  
  Charles M. Wallace, Jr. and Raquel A. Wallace
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 20006 Waco Road, Apple Valley, California 92308
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Charles M. Wallace Jr. Represented By Robert W Ripley
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Raquel A. Wallace Represented By Robert W Ripley
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A./Wells Fargo Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Charles M. Wallace, Jr. and Raquel A. Wallace
  Norman Harrison Armin M Kolenovic
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11658
  
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 31
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it is unclear if effective service was made upon "borrower" Anthony Elie. Furthermore, because Anthony Elie is not a party to the note he is not a co-debtor within the meaning of the statute.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15728
  
  Jesus Angel Acosta and Maria Teresa Acosta
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2007 GMC LIGHT DUTY Sierra 1500 Regular Cab SLE 4WD
  
  MOVANT: CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE
  
  From: 1/23/18 EH
  Docket 27
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/29/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/23/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under § 2. DENY request under § 5 because the motion has not been served on any co-debtor as that term is used in § 1301(a).
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jesus Angel Acosta Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Teresa Acosta Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Jesus Angel Acosta and Maria Teresa Acosta
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  
  Chapter 13
  Capital One Auto Finance, a Represented By Bret D. Allen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15792
  
  William Martin Farber
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 68300 Encinitas Rd, Cathedral City Ca 92234
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  EH
  
  Docket 20
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Martin Farber Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15822
  
  Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 BMW 3 Series Sedan 4D 320xi
  
  MOVANT: FINANCIAL SERVICES VEHICLE TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 77
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). DENY request for relief under § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alfredo Loera Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Veronica O Loera Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Financial Services Vehicle Trust Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera
  
  Bret D. Allen
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-16455
  
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1695 La Praix Street, Highland, CA 92346-4678
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
  
  From:12/19/17 EH
  Docket 34
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 1/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  12/19/2017
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Movant to confirm cure, and parties to discuss adequate protection. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason Represented By Brad Weil
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17609
  
  Danny Howard Weeks
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 73971 Samarkand Dr, Twentynine Palms CA 92277
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  EH
  
  Docket 25
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth
  Movant(s):
  WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18653
  
  Martha Mata
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Ford F150, VIN: 1FTEW1C8XFKD68632
  
  MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 34
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Martha Mata Represented By
  Inez Tinoco-Vaca
  Movant(s):
  Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
  Sheryl K Ith
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18909
  
  Deborah Voorhis Harmon
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1048 Occidental Circle, Redlands, CA 92374
  
  MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FANNIE MAE)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Deborah Voorhis Harmon Represented By Douglas A Plazak
  Movant(s):
  Federal National Mortgage Represented By Nichole Glowin
  Trustee(s):
  Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Deborah Voorhis Harmon
  
  Brandon J Iskander
  
  Chapter 7
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20479
  
  Tinetta Christina Cotton
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: Real Property 459 W. Ramona Dr. Rialto 92376
  
  MOVANT: R&U BUILDER
  
  EH
  
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Okay Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tinetta Christina Cotton Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  R&U Builder Represented By
  William E Windham
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10160
  
  Eri A. Doulos
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Freightliner Cascadia
  
  MOVANT: CRESCO CAPITAL INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 9
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eri A. Doulos Represented By
  Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Cresco Capital, Inc. Represented By James R Selth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10240
  
  Guillermo Zamudio
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY
  
  MOVANT: GUILLERMO ZAMUDIO
  
  EH
  
  Docket 18
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for improper service. The motion indicates that it is being set on regular notice, however, the matter was actually set on shortened notice. This Court’s self-calendaring procedures for setting a motion to continue the automatic stay on shortened notice require that secured creditors be served pursuant to Rule 7004, which did not occur.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Guillermo Zamudio Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Guillermo Zamudio Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15816
  
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #14.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
  Chapter 13
  
  And 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(4)(A)(v) specifically states that the term "household goods," for purposes of § 522(f)(1)(B)(i), is limited to one television. Once again, Debtors’ attempt to avoid the lien with respect to multiple televisions appears to be statutorily impermissible.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court intends to DENY the motion and issue an OSC why attorney Sundee Teeple should not be sanctioned for filing a frivolous motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jesse Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Rocio Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Jesse Delgado and Rocio Delgado
  
  Chapter 13
  Jesse Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Rocio Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (SA) Cohen (TR)
  12:30 PM
  6:12-31792
  
  Jesse Delgado and Rocio Delgado
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Trustee's Verified Motion to Dismiss Case Also #1
  EH
  
  Docket 167
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jesse Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Rocio Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (SA) Cohen (TR)
  12:31 PM
  6:12-27553
  
  Mary Black-Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 11/9/17, 1/11/18 EH
  
  Docket 56
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mary Black-Williams Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:12-36522
  
  Jacquelyn Anna Palmer
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 12/14/17 EH
  Docket 79
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jacquelyn Anna Palmer Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:31 PM
  6:12-37244
  
  Niculaie David and Sidonia David
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms EH
  Docket 101
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Niculaie David Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sidonia David Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:32 PM
  6:16-20260
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al
  
  #6.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc., against Javier Lopez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
  
  From: 5/11/17, 6/22/17, 8/17/17, 10/19/17, 11/9/17, 2/1/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/22/18 AT 12:30 P.M. - ANOTHER SUMMONS ISSUED
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Defendant(s):
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Carmen Lopez Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Plaintiff(s):
  Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By
  Eamon Jafari
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:14-21228
  
  Roy Kenneth Scott and Tashiea Scott
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Order to show cause why Sunita Sood should not be sanctioned for materially modifying the mandatory form plan
  
  EH
  
  Docket 100
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Roy Kenneth Scott Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tashiea Scott Represented By
  Sunita N Sood
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-17241
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #3
  
  Also #9 & #10 EH
  Docket 22
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On August 29, 2017, Corinthia Williams ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On October 23, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On December 6, 2017, LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $1,357.47 ("Claim 3"). The same day LVNV filed a second unsecured claim in the amount of $910.02 ("Claim 4"). Six days later LVNV filed a third unsecured claim in the amount of $467.21 ("Claim 5"). On January 5, 2018, Debtor filed claim objections to all three claims.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  1. Statute of Limitations-Proof of Claim
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:
    
    Chapter 13
    1. Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—
      1. such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;
    CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337 (2016) provides a statute of limitations of four years for debts founded on written contracts, book accounts, accounts stated based upon account in writing, "balance of mutual, open and current account in writing," and rescission of written contract. Once the statute of limitations has passed, the claim is unenforceable. See e.g., Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U.S. 126 (1938).
  2. Claim 3
    
    Claim 3 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identifies a last transaction date of July 16, 2007. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 3 is unenforceable.
  3. Claim 4
    
    Claim 4 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of May 6, 2002. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 4 is unenforceable.
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    
    Chapter 13
  4. Claim 5
  Claim 5 is based on "retail" debt. The claim’s supporting documentation suggests that the claim fits within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337.
  Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of February 15, 2008. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 5 is unenforceable.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claims 3, 4 and 5 are DISALLOWED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within seven days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-17241
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #4
  
  Also #8 & #10 EH
  Docket 23
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On August 29, 2017, Corinthia Williams ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On October 23, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On December 6, 2017, LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $1,357.47 ("Claim 3"). The same day LVNV filed a second unsecured claim in the amount of $910.02 ("Claim 4"). Six days later LVNV filed a third unsecured claim in the amount of $467.21 ("Claim 5"). On January 5, 2018, Debtor filed claim objections to all three claims.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  1. Statute of Limitations-Proof of Claim
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:
    
    Chapter 13
    1. Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—
      1. such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;
    CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337 (2016) provides a statute of limitations of four years for debts founded on written contracts, book accounts, accounts stated based upon account in writing, "balance of mutual, open and current account in writing," and rescission of written contract. Once the statute of limitations has passed, the claim is unenforceable. See e.g., Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U.S. 126 (1938).
  2. Claim 3
    
    Claim 3 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identifies a last transaction date of July 16, 2007. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 3 is unenforceable.
  3. Claim 4
    
    Claim 4 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of May 6, 2002. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 4 is unenforceable.
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    
    Chapter 13
  4. Claim 5
  Claim 5 is based on "retail" debt. The claim’s supporting documentation suggests that the claim fits within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337.
  Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of February 15, 2008. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 5 is unenforceable.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claims 3, 4 and 5 are DISALLOWED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within seven days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-17241
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #5
  
  Also #8 & #9 EH
  Docket 24
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On August 29, 2017, Corinthia Williams ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On October 23, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On December 6, 2017, LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $1,357.47 ("Claim 3"). The same day LVNV filed a second unsecured claim in the amount of $910.02 ("Claim 4"). Six days later LVNV filed a third unsecured claim in the amount of $467.21 ("Claim 5"). On January 5, 2018, Debtor filed claim objections to all three claims.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  1. Statute of Limitations-Proof of Claim
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:
    
    Chapter 13
    1. Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—
      1. such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;
    CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337 (2016) provides a statute of limitations of four years for debts founded on written contracts, book accounts, accounts stated based upon account in writing, "balance of mutual, open and current account in writing," and rescission of written contract. Once the statute of limitations has passed, the claim is unenforceable. See e.g., Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U.S. 126 (1938).
  2. Claim 3
    
    Claim 3 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identifies a last transaction date of July 16, 2007. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 3 is unenforceable.
  3. Claim 4
    
    Claim 4 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of May 6, 2002. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 4 is unenforceable.
    12:32 PM
    CONT...
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    
    Chapter 13
  4. Claim 5
  Claim 5 is based on "retail" debt. The claim’s supporting documentation suggests that the claim fits within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337.
  Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of February 15, 2008. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 5 is unenforceable.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claims 3, 4 and 5 are DISALLOWED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within seven days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19661
  
  Edward James Singelyn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edward James Singelyn Represented By Bruce Babcock
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19719
  
  Frank J Cordova
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Frank J Cordova Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19722
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with FCI Lender Services, 2005 Residential Trust 3-2, Countrywide Bank FSB
  HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 1/4/18 Also #14
  EH
  
  Docket 14
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/04/2018
  Summary of the Motion:
  Notice: Proper
  Opposition: Yes
  Address: 24420 Robie Ct in Moreno Valley, CA 92551
  First trust deed: $277,791.30 with Bank of America
  Second trust deed (to be avoided): $115,756.89 with 2005 Residential Trust 3-2 ("Creditor")
  Fair market value: $270,000 (Appraisal)
  
  TENTATIVE
  Creditor by its opposition requests a continuance of at least 30 days to obtain a verified appraisal of the Property.
  
  Debtor argues that because the Motion must be filed and heard prior to confirmation of the chapter 13 plan, a continuance of the Motion cannot be granted. However, the Debtor presumes that the plan will be confirmed on January 4, 2018. It is common practice to permit secured creditors an opportunity to obtain an appraisal prior to ruling on a motion to avoid junior lien. Debtor provides no authority for the proposition that such a continuance would be unjustified in circumstances such as these nor has the Debtor articulated any legal prejudice that would result from the
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  continuance.
  
  In sum, the Court finds no merit in the Debtor’s reply. A continuance of the Motion for the appraisal is warranted.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Movant(s):
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19722
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  Also #13 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19853
  
  Diego Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Diego Lopez Represented By
  Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20019
  
  Frank Prouty
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Frank Prouty Represented By
  Nima S Vokshori
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20037
  
  Misti Gory
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/27/17
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Misti Gory Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20055
  
  Laquance Denise Mejia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Laquance Denise Mejia Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20114
  
  Frank Garcia and Susan Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Frank Garcia Represented By
  Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Susan Garcia Represented By
  Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20117
  
  Tiffany Venice Turner
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Tiffany Venice Turner Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20121
  
  Agustin Napolion Joya and Dora Maria Joya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Agustin Napolion Joya Represented By Daniel King
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Dora Maria Joya Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:13-21894
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/1/18
  EH
  
  Docket 142
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:14-25360
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Make Plan Payments EH
  Docket 71
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On December, 2014, William & Kathie Meineke ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On February 9, 2015, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The mandatory Chapter 13 form plan contains a provision (Section V.H) which states: "The Debtor will pay timely all postconfirmation tax liabilities directly to the appropriate taxing authorities as they become due."
  
  Since confirmation the Trustee has filed five motions to dismiss, all of which were ultimately resolved. Additionally, the Chapter 13 plan has been modified twice. On January 10, 2018, the California Franchise Tax Board ("CFTB") filed a motion to dismiss or convert to Chapter 7 on the basis that Debtors had not paid their postconfirmation taxes. The Court notes that the motion was served on Debtors’ attorney, but was not served on Debtors.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  The Court will continue the matter for CFTB to serve the motion on Debtors.
  12:33 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Regarding the merits, the Court notes that 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c)(6) provides for dismissal or conversion for cause, which is defined to include "material default by the debtor with respect to a term of a confirmed plan." Here, the Court notes that Debtors’ confirmed plan provided that all postconfirmation tax liabilities were to be timely paid. CFTB has provided evidence that Debtors’ have yet to satisfy their 2014, 2015 and 2016 tax liabilities which constitutes a material default satisfying § 1307(c)(6).
  Because Debtors do not appear to have meaningful unencumbered, unexempt assets, this Court would be inclined to dismiss the case rather than convert it to Chapter 7.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter to March 8, 2017 at 12:30 p.m. for proper service of the motion on Debtors.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kathie Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Movant(s):
  FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Represented By Suman Mathews
  12:33 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:16-10066
  
  Saul Lara Sanchez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 51
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Saul Lara Sanchez Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:16-18248
  
  Juan Jose Franco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 76
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juan Jose Franco Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:16-21181
  
  Luis Fernando Buenrostro
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/18/18, 2/1/18
  EH
  
  Docket 46
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Luis Fernando Buenrostro Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:17-15604
  
  Mandy Catron
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mandy Catron Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  1:00 PM
  6:18-10628
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #28.00 CONT Motion to Use Cash Collateral Advanced From: 2/13/18
  EH
  
  Docket 6
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On January 26, 2018, Markus Boyd ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On January 30, 2018, Debtor filed various "first-day motions": (1) motion to set budget for interim use of estate property; (2) motion for continuation of utility service;
  (3) motion to employ counsel; and (4) motion to use cash collateral. Regarding the latter, an application shortening time was filed, and, on February 1, 2018, the Court set a hearing for February 8, 2018 at 1:00 p.m.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  11 U.S.C. § 363(a) defines cash collateral as:
  
  cash, negotiable instruments, documents of title, securities, deposit accounts, or other cash equivalents whenever acquired in which the estate and an entity other than the estate have an interest and includes the proceeds, products,
  1:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  offspring, rents, or profits of property and the fees, charges, accounts or other payments for the use or occupancy of rooms and other public facilities in hotels, motels, or other lodging properties subject to a security interest as provided in section 552(b) of this title, whether existing before or after the commencement of a case under this title.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 363(b) provides for the use, sale, or lease of property of the estate outside of the ordinary course of business after notice and a hearing. Here, the cash collateral at issue appears to be $600 month in rental income generated by Debtor from renting his guest house to his father. Debtor also asserts that there is significant equity in the real property. Given the equity in the property, the small value of the cash collateral at issue, the lack of any opposition, and the fact that Debtor proposes to make regular monthly payments to two of the three secured creditors (Debtor disputes the validity of the third creditor’s claim), the Court finds use of cash collateral on an interim basis to be warranted.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion. Counsel to discuss requested length of use of cash collateral.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  Movant(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By
  1:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Nicholas W Gebelt
  
  Chapter 11
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10414
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14785 Alba Way Moreno Valley, CA 92553
  
  MOVANT: LEONEL VILLA & LUCILA PINEDA
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  The prior case was dismissed on recommendation of the chapter 13 trustee because the Debtors failed to appear at the 341(a) meeting of creditors, failed to tender the November plan payment, and failed to account for the postpetition mortgage payment for November.
  
  At the confirmation hearing on November 16, 2017, the Debtor’s appearance counsel indicated that the Debtors had to travel to Mexico for a family emergency. The Debtor’s declaration in support of the Motion reiterates this assertion. However, the attached booking confirmation indicates a return trip on Tuesday, November 7, 2017 (over a week prior to the 341(a) meeting of creditors held on November 16, 2017).
  This discrepancy is not explained by the Debtors. Nor did the Debtors address the failure to tender a November plan payment or to account for their November 2017 mortgage payment – which were two other bases for dismissal.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lucila Pineda Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Luis G Torres
  
  Chapter 13
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres Luis G Torres Luis G Torres
  Lucila Pineda Represented By Luis G Torres Luis G Torres Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20475
  
  Inez Verdugo
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 FLHR Road King
  
  MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/18
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Inez Verdugo Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Movant(s):
  LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17910
  
  Harry Rhee
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43928 Brookhaven Ct., Temecula, CA 92592
  
  MOVANT: BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 9
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay and GRANT authority to offer loan workout options under ¶3 of the prayer for relief.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Harry Rhee Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, Represented By
  Edward G Schloss
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-13804
  
  John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Mazda 5
  
  MOVANT: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA
  
  From: 1/9/18 EH
  Docket 36
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John P Morris Represented By
  Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Cassandra M Morris Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Movant(s):
  JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris
  Jamie D Hanawalt
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-13608
  
  Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8893 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Subject to discussions re adequate protection, the Court’s tentative is to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay, GRANT authority to offer loan workout options pursuant to ¶3 of prayer for relief and GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Warren Alan Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelly Suzanne Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
  
  Chapter 13
  U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-13394
  
  Howard Edward Terrell, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 944 Randall Ranch Road, Corona, CA 92881
  
  MOVANT: BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 22
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Howard Edward Terrell Jr. Represented By Paul Horn
  Movant(s):
  BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, Represented By
  Edward G Schloss
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11657
  
  Victor Balvaneda
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Nissan Sentra, VIN # 3N1AB7AP5DL664132
  
  MOVANT: NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Victor Balvaneda Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE Represented By
  Michael D Vanlochem
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
  10:00 AM
  6:16-20056
  
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell and Kelly Jean Tyrrell
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15366 Cayuse CT, Riverside, California 92506-5794
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 63
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(4). Court finds that bankruptcy case was part of a scheme to hinder, delay and defraud creditor based on multiple bankruptcy filings affecting this property. The Court finds bad faith as to the Debtor. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT pursuant to ¶¶ 3 and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell Represented By Matthew Abbasi
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelly Jean Tyrrell Represented By Matthew Abbasi
  Movant(s):
  WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS Represented By
  Mark D Estle
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Todd Christopher Tyrrell and Kelly Jean Tyrrell
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes Laila Masud
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14287
  
  Brent Duane Larson and Sarah Marnet Larson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32504 Bergamo Court, Temecula, California 92592
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 67
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay and GRANT request for relief under ¶3.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Brent Duane Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sarah Marnet Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Movant(s):
  U.S. BANK, NATIONAL Represented By April Harriott Shreena Augustin Seth Greenhill
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Brent Duane Larson and Sarah Marnet Larson
  Keith Labell Sean C Ferry
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14084
  
  Martin Linares and Elvia Linares
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Kia Optima, VIN: KNAGM4A78C5273567
  
  MOVANT: CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 65
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Subject to discussions regarding adequate protection, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT request for relief from the co-debtor stay and GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Martin Linares Represented By Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elvia Linares Represented By
  Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Martin Linares and Elvia Linares
  
  Chapter 13
  Carmax Business Services LLC Represented By Jennifer H Wang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-13233
  
  Sherry Ann Beardsley
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1041 W 27th St, San Bernardino, CA 92405-3121
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  From: 1/9/18, 1/23/18 EH
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Movant to confirm that arrears have been cured. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sherry Ann Beardsley Represented By Jeffrey D Larkin
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Mark D Estle Bruce E Brown
  Beverly Lorraine Evans Dane W Exnowski
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Sherry Ann Beardsley
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-10066
  
  Saul Lara Sanchez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1412 W Arrow HWY, Upland, CA 91786
  
  MOVANT: CAM XII TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 52
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/12/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Saul Lara Sanchez Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Movant(s):
  CAM XII TRUST, its successors Represented By
  Reilly D Wilkinson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-15816
  
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #13.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 2/6/18 EH
  Docket 102
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
  Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10628
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #14.00 Motion to Use Cash Collateral EH
  Docket 6
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVANCED TO 2/8/18 AT 1:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  Movant(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #15.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Approval of Stipulations Regarding Debtor's Use of Cash Collateral
  
  From: 10/5/17, 11/14/17 Also #16 & #17
  EH
  
  Docket 32
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #16.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 1/30/18
  Also #15 & #17 EH
  Docket 82
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Background
  On August 25, 2017, Rick’s Patio, Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The Debtor is a California corporation, engaged in the business of selling new and used hot tubs (spas) and related supplies. The Debtor has designated itself as a small business under 11 U.S.C. § 101(51C).
  
  On January 30, 2018, the Court granted the Debtor’s request for an extension of time to have its plan of reorganization confirmed such that a hearing on the Debtor’s disclosure statement could take place prior to the confirmation hearing. The Debtor’s disclosure statement ("Disclosure Statement") and plan ("Plan") were filed on December 26, 2017.
  
  Related Documents:
  - Motion to Approve Disclosure Statement (Doc. #82);
  - Disclosure Statement (Doc. #83); and
  - Chapter 11 Plan (Doc. #89) (amended to include original signatures);
  Standard
  Before a disclosure statement may be approved after notice and a hearing, the court must find that the proposed disclosure statement contains "adequate information" to solicit acceptance or rejection of a proposed plan of reorganization.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  11 U.S.C. § 1125(b).
  "Adequate information" means information of a kind, and in sufficient detail, so far as is reasonably practicable in light of the nature and history of the debtor and the condition of the debtor's books and records, that would enable a hypothetical reasonable investor typical of the holders of claims against the estate to make a decision on the proposed plan of reorganization. 11 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
  There is no set list of required elements to provide adequate information per se. A case may arise where previously enumerated factors are not sufficient to provide adequate information. Conversely, a case may arise where previously enumerated factors are not required to provide adequate information. In re Metrocraft Pub. Services, Inc., 39 B.R. 567 (Bankr. N.D.Ga. 1984). "Adequate information" is a flexible concept that permits the degree of disclosure to be tailored to the particular situation, but there is an irreducible minimum, particularly as to how the plan will be implemented. In re Michelson, 141 B.R. 715, 718-19 (Bankr. E.D.Cal. 1992).
  Courts have developed lists of relevant factors for the determination of adequate disclosure. See, e.g., In re A.C. Williams Co., 25 B.R. 173, 176 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1982), In re Ferretti, 128 B.R. 16, 18–19 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1991), In re Malek, 10
  C.B.C.2d 189, 35 B.R. 443, 443–44 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1983), In re Metrocraft, 39
  B.R. 567, 568 (Bankr. N.D.Ga. 1984), In re Scioto Valley Mortgage Co., 88 B.R. 168, 170–71 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1988), In re U.S. Brass Corp., 194 B.R. 420, 424–25 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 1996).
  This Court should determine what factors are relevant and required in light of the facts and circumstances surrounding each particular case. In re East Redley Corp., 16 B.R. 429 (Bankr. E.D.Pa. 1982).
  
  Plan Summary
  1. Effective Date: 90 days after entry of the confirmation order
  2. Administrative Claims
    1. Rosenstein & Associates (BK Counsel): $30,000 (Paid in full on Effective Date)
    2. Shafer & MacRae (Accounting Services): $5,000
    3. Debtor’s projections indicate they will have enough funds to cover the Administrative Claims on the Effective Date
  3. Priority Claims
    Description
    Amount Owed
    Treatment
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    State of California
    Unknown. Debtor is
    Paid in full by August 25,
    
    currently
    2022
    
    Subject to an audit but
    
    disputes
    
    Any net liability
  4. Secured Claims
    Description
    Amount Owed
    Treatment
    Class 1: Wells Fargo Comm. Distribution
    Finance LLC
    Secured Claim:
    $773,050.60
    Unimpaired
    Unclear
    Class 2: First Home Bank
    Secured Claim:
    $257,858.19
    Unimpaired
    Unclear
  5. Unsecured Claims
    Description
    Amount Owed
    Treatment
    Class 3: General Unsecured
    Total Claims:
    Paid in full within 72
    Claims
    $1,590,337.12
    months of
    
    Impaired
    Effective Date
    
    Unclear
  6. Equity (Class 4)
  Will be left unaffected by the Plan
  
  Liquidation Analysis
  Debtor asserts that the Plan will pay 100% to all classes under the Plan terms but asserts that only the First and Second liendholders would receive any value under a liquidation (sale of the Debtor’s inventory)
  
  Feasibility
  The Disclosure Statement is not sufficiently clear regarding the payments to secured creditors. For both Wells Fargo and First Home Bank, the DS and Plan indicate that the claims will be paid in accordance with the agreements with these respective
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  lenders. However, without a summary explanation of how these lenders agreements provide for payments, an investor would have difficulty understanding how large the payments are in proportion to the sales receipts such that an investor can gauge the Debtor’s profitability. Additionally, there is no indication of the intervals, and amount of payments that will be made to GUCs (only that they will be paid over a 72 month period, e.g. will they be paid quarterly or monthly?)
  
  Other issues of note:
  - It appears that the Debtor seeks to avoid the junior liens via the plan. However, avoidance of liens without a motion or adversary has resulted in litigation by junior secured creditors in other cases arguing that their lien has ridden through the bankruptcy. The Court will require, at a minimum, separate notice of avoidance.
  - Also, if junior liens will be paid with unsecured claimants in Class 3, then why do the financial projections show ongoing payments to SBA and FAF Loans? (are those the WF and FH loans?)
  - The description of risk factors is woefully inadequate. The Debtor provides no market analysis at all. Relatedly, the pre-bankruptcy events which prompted the filing are not adequately explained. The Debtor indicates that bankruptcy was prompted by entry into "several large financing agreements" with payments that could no longer be maintained. However, the Debtor does not explain what prompted it to borrow money. Were there market forces that weakened demand, for example, such that the Debtor borrowed money and what are the risks of a dip in demand in the future? Other risk factors might include explanation of the consistency of the demand for spa equipment overall, or explanation of whether the sale of spas is a particularly competitive market, etc.
  - The Debtor should also provide a monthly cash flow analysis.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #17.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 9/26/17, 11/14/17 Also #15 & #16
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  11:00 AM
  6:11-12917
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Order to Show Cause Hearing Why Matthew Resnik, Brad and Deborah Stoddard should not be sanctioned
  (Holding date)
  
  From: 8/31/17, 10/2/17, 10/18/17, 11/15/17, 12/20/17, 1/24/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 110
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  01/24/2018
  The Court having received informal notice of a pending settlement between the parties, the hearing on this matter shall be continued to February 14, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for the parties to finalize an agreement. Should the matter be resolved prior to the continued hearing, the February 14 hearing shall come off calendar.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Telephonic appearances are authorized for the February 14, 2018, continued hearing.
  
  10/18/17
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On January 28, 2011, Brad & Deborah Stoddard ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On May 24, 2011, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The plan contained the following provision, section V.F.: "The debt of american Education Services will be discharged; the school has been stripped of accreditation and is on probation." On December 5, 2016, Debtors received a discharge, and, on January 13, 2017, the case was closed.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  On May 11, 2017, Debtors filed a motion for an order to show cause why creditor American Educational Services ("AES") should not be held in contempt court, and for damages and attorney’s fees, for intentionally violating the discharge injunction.
  Because of inadequate service, the motion was originally denied without prejudice, and Debtors refiled the motion on June 1, 2017. AES filed its opposition on June 8, 2017. At a hearing on the matter on July 27, 2017, the Court continued the matter to October 2, 2017.
  
  On July 31, 2017, the Court issued its Order to Show Cause why Matthew Resnik ("Resnik"), Brad Stoddard, and Deborah Stoddard should not be sanctioned for including a prohibited provision in a Chapter 13 plan (the "OSC"). Debtors filed their opposition on August 14, 2017. Resnik filed his opposition on August 17, 2017. AES filed its reply on August 24, 2017. Resnick filed supplemental responses on September 21 and 22, 2017.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Introduction
    
    The OSC is issued in light of, and accordance with, the Supreme Court’s decision in United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa, 559 U.S. 260 (2010). In Espinosa, the bankruptcy court had confirmed a Chapter 13 plan which purported to discharge student loan debt without complying with the applicable procedural requirements.
    After intercepting debtor’s income tax refund to use towards payment of student loans, the creditor argued that the bankruptcy court’s order confirming the debtor’s Chapter 13 plan should be declared void. The Supreme Court held that, absent a jurisdictional or due process violation (which was not present) the bankruptcy court’s legal error in confirming the Chapter 13 plan with a provision that impermissibly discharged student loan debt, did not render the order void. At the conclusion of its opinion, the Supreme Court opined:
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
    
    Chapter 13
    
    We acknowledge the potential for bad-faith litigation tactics. But expanding the availability of relief under Rule 60(b)(4) is not an appropriate prophylaxis. As we stated in Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz, 503 U.S. 638 (1992), "debtors and their attorneys face penalties under various provisions for engaging in improper conduct in bankruptcy proceedings." Id. at 644; see also FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011. The specter of such penalties should deter bad-faith attempts to discharge student loan debt without the undue hardship finding Congress required.
    
    Espinosa, 559 U.S. at 278. Here, the Court is tasked with interpreting and implementing the guidance provided by the Supreme Court in Espinosa.
    
    Debtors and Resnick have filed separate responses to the Court’s OSC. Debtors have raised five arguments in their opposition: (1) that the Court already found that the plan was filed in good faith; (2) that the plan must be given res judicata effect; (3) that the Court is exceeding its discretionary sanctioning authority; (4) that the OSC is an illegal ex post facto law; and (5) that FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011 is inapplicable.
    Resnick offers the following categories of arguments in his opposition: (1) use of the Court’s inherent sanctioning authority is inappropriate here; (2) Rule 9011 sanctions require a contempt finding; (3) Section 105 is inapplicable; and (4) the plan provision at issue is not prohibited. The Court will analyze the respondents’ arguments separately.
  2. Debtors’ Opposition
    1. The Court’s Good Faith Finding
      
      11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(3) states:
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
      
      Chapter 13
      1. Except as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm a plan if –
        (3) the plan has been proposed in good faith and not by any means forbidden by law
        
        Debtors argue that: "[i]t necessarily follows [from § 1325(a)(3)] that the Court has already made an express finding that the Plan was filed in good faith." This result does not necessarily follow from the language of the statute. The plain language of § 1325(a) operates to eliminate the discretion of the court if the court finds that the debtor has satisfied the nine subsections of § 1325(a); the provision does not state the consequences of a finding that some, but not all, of the § 1325(a) subsections have been satisfied. As is stated by the leading bankruptcy treatise:
        
        The standards set forth in section 1325(a), however, are not requirements that must be met in every case before a plan can be confirmed. Unlike section 1322(a), section 1325(a) does not state that "the plan shall" comply with its listed criteria. Nor does it state, as does section 1129(a), that the court shall confirm the plan only if certain requirements are met. Instead it states only that if its criteria are met the court must confirm the plan. Therefore, the court has discretion to confirm a plan that does not comply with all of the standards of section 1325(a), particularly if no party objects.
        
        8 COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.01 (16th ed. 2016) (footnotes omitted).
        
        Despite the plain language of the statute, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, without any independent analysis, and relying on an out of circuit bankruptcy court decision, has determined that the requirements of § 1325(a) are mandatory for Chapter 13 plan confirmation. See In Chinichian, 784 F.2d 1440, 1443-44 (9th Cir. 1986) ("For a court to confirm a plan, each of the requirements of section 1325 must be present and the debtor has the burden of proving that each element has been met.") (citing In re Elkind, 11 B.R. 473, 476 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1981)). While it remains unclear from
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
        
        Chapter 13
        where the mandatory characterization of § 1325(a) arose, a variety of courts have, in passing, assumed that the § 1325(a) standards are mandatory for plan confirmation. See, e.g., Assocs. Comm. Corp. v. Rash, 520 U.S. 953, 956 (1997) ("To qualify for confirmation under Chapter 13, the Rashes’ plan had to satisfy the requirements set forth in § 1325(a) of the Code."); Shaw v. Aurgroup Fin. Credit Union, 552 F.3d 447, 459 (6th Cir. 2009) ("Numerous district and bankruptcy courts outside the Fifth, Ninth, Tent, and Eleventh Circuits, including courts within this circuit, have also held, suggested, or assumed that the provision in § 1325(a) are mandatory.") (collecting cases). But see In re Szostek, 886 F.2d 1405, 1411 (3rd Cir. 1989) ("On the other hand, if the conditions of § 1325 are not met, although the requirements of § 1322 are fulfilled, the court has the discretion to confirm the plan. If Congress had intended for
        § 1325(a) to be mandatory, it could have included that requirement with the requirements already listed in § 1322); see also Matter of Escobedo, 28 F.3d 34, 34 (7th Cir. 1994) ("We note, however, as did the court in Szostek, that while the provisions of § 1325(a)(5) may be discretionary[,] the requirements of § 1322(a)(2) are mandatory.). Indeed, even Espinosa appears to implicitly assume that the § 1325(a) requirements are mandatory. See 559 U.S. 260, 277 ("That is because § 1325(a) instructs a bankruptcy court to confirm a plan only if the court finds, inter alia, that the plan complies with the ‘applicable provisions’ of the Code.") (emphasis added). Therefore, it would appear that binding case law suggests that the § 1325(a) requirements, including good faith, are mandatory requirements for confirmation.
    2. Res Judicata
      
      While the Court accepts Debtors’ argument that, by confirming their Chapter 13 plan, the Court implicitly found that the plan was filed in good faith, the Court rejects Debtors’ argument that that finding is res judicata with regard to the Court. 11 U.S.C.
      § 1327(a) states: "The provisions of a confirmed plan bind the debtor and each creditor, whether or not the claim of such creditor is provided for by the plan, and whether or not such creditor has objected to, has accepted, or has rejected the plan." The Court is not a creditor and Debtors have advanced no argument as to how
      § 1327(a) would prevent the Court from revisiting its finding of good faith. In fact, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion that concluded the § 1325(a) requirements were mandatory stated the following: "Because section 1325(a)(3) of Title 11 requires the Chinichians to propose their plan in good faith, the bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to revoke a plan if the plan was not filed in good faith." In re Chinichian, 784 F.2d 1440, 1442 (9th Cir. 1986). The Ninth Circuit’s further comments indicate
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
      
      Chapter 13
      that it believed such powers were expansive:
      
      The Chinichians argue, however, that because section 1330 is a specific statute it should govern the more general section 105. The Mancari rationale that a specific statute cannot be nullified by a more general one is only applicable where a conflict exists.
      
      Section 1330 provides a method of revoking a confirmation order "on request of a party in interest." While it does not specifically authorize such a revocation by the court sua sponte, it does not prohibit such action. Section 105 constitutes authority for the court to issue any order necessary to carry out the provisions of the Code. That reservoir of power in no manner conflicts with the authority to act upon the request of an interested party, but constitutes a supplemental method of revocation in the event of fraud. It would be absurd to hold that the bankruptcy court is powerless to correct a fraud unless first requested by an interested party, and that is not what section 1330 provides.
      
      Section 105 sets out the power of the bankruptcy court to fashion orders as necessary pursuant to the purposes of the Bankruptcy Code.
      
      Further, a bankruptcy court is a court of equity. As a court of equity, it may look through form to the substance of a transaction and devise new remedies where those at law are inadequate. Further, it can modify or vacate its order so long as no intervening right has become vested in reliance thereon. Thus, the bankruptcy court had equitable power to revoke its order partially confirming the Chinichians’ plan once it recognized the Chinichians did not file their plan in good faith as required by section 1325(a)(3).
      
      Id. at 1442-43 (citations omitted).
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
      
      Chapter 13
      Debtors’ argument that § 1327 operates to prevent the Court from modifying its implicit good faith finding when confirming the plan lacks merit. The statute states that the terms of the provisions of a confirmed plan are binding on the debtor and creditors. The Court is not a creditor or a debtor nor is the Court’s good faith finding a provision of a confirmed plan. Nor does res judicata prevent a court from revoking or amending its own order. Such a principle would eliminate the ability to revoke or modify a judgment altogether, rendering obsolete FED. R. CIV. P. Rules 59 & 60, in addition to many others legal provisions. Debtors’ argument that the Court is bound by its own previous finding due to res judiciata is not compelling.
    3. The Court Lacks Authority to Issue Sanctions
      
      Debtors’ argument that the Court lacks authority to issue sanctions can be summarized in the following: (1) the Court is precluded from finding that the plan was proposed in bad faith due to res judicata; and (2) the Court must find that the plan was proposed in bad faith for sanctions to be warranted. Because the Court rejects (1), as outlined above, Debtors’ argument must fail.
    4. The OSC is an "Illegal Ex Post Facto Law"
      
      In their fourth argument, Debtors argue that this OSC is an ex post facto law. As noted by Debtors, Art. 1 §§ 9 & 10 of the Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws. Article 1 of the Constitution deals with the legislative branch – the branch of the government that makes laws. The Judicial Branch does not make laws. Debtors’ argument that a court order is an ex post facto law is therefore, necessarily, invalid.
    5. Rule 9011 is Inapplicable
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(b)(2) states:
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
      
      Chapter 13
      
      By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a petition, pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, --
      
      (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(c)(1)(B) states: "[O]n its own initiative, the court may enter an order describing the specific conduct that appears to violate subdivision (b) and directing an attorney, law firm, or party to show cause why it has not violated subdivision (b) with respect thereto."
      
      Debtors’ nine subsection argument why FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011 is inapplicable is rather chaotic and disorganized. Regardless, the Court acknowledges that, as to Debtors, Rule 9011 sanctions are inapplicable due to the operation of Rule 9011(c)(2) (A). Therefore, the Court agrees that Rule 9011 cannot operate as the source of sanctions against Debtors.
  3. Resnick’s Opposition
  A. Inherent Sanctioning Authority
  
  The Supreme Court has stated: "it is firmly established that the power to punish for contempts is inherent in all courts." Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991) (quoting Ex parte Robinson, 19 Wall. 505, 510 (1874)); see also Fink v. Gomez, 239
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  1. 3d 989, 992 (9th Cir. 2001) ("[T]he district court has the inherent authority to impose sanctions for bad faith, which includes a broad range of willful improper conduct."). The Ninth Circuit has stated: "Itel teaches that sanctions are justified when a party acts for an improper purpose – even if the act consists of making a truthful statement or a non-frivolous argument or objection. Fink, 239 F.3d at 922; see also In re Dyer, 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing bad faith and willful misconduct).
  Nevertheless, as Resnick states: "when there is bad-faith conduct in the course of litigation that could be adequately sanctioned under the Rules, the court ordinarily should rely on the Rules rather than the inherent power." Chambers, 501 U.S. at 50. Because the Court believes that the existing framework provides an adequate basis for sanctions in this type of situation, the Court need not rely on its inherent sanctioning authority.
  
  B. Rule 9011
  
  When imposing sanctions, sua sponte, under FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011, "sanctions ‘will ordinarily be imposed only in situations that are akin to a contempt of court.’" United Nat’l Ins. Co. v. R&D Latex Corp., 242 F.3d 1102, 1116 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Barber v. Miller, 146 F.3d 707, 711 (9th Cir. 1998); see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 11, Advisory Committee Notes ("Since show cause orders will ordinarily be issued only in situations that are akin to a contempt of court, the rule does not provide a ‘safe harbor’ to a litigant for withdrawing a claim, defense, etc., after a show cause has been issued on the court’s own initiative."). "[P]rior to imposing court-initiated sanctions, the district court is required to determine whether counsel’s conduct is ‘akin to contempt.’" Gonzalez v. Texaco Inc., 344 Fed. Appx. 304, 308 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting R&D Latex Corp., 242 F.3d 1102, 1118)).
  
  In this situation, the Court defers to Bankruptcy Judge TeSelle:
  
  At the hearing on the motions to dismiss conducted by the Court in these cases
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  on May 2, 2000, it was clear to the Court that debtors’ counsel included these plan provisions in the hope that they would trap an unwary student loan creditor. If a plan containing a student loan discharge provision is confirmed, debtors and their counsel argue that the student loan obligation is discharged under the theory of res judicata, improperly relying on a skewed interpretation of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in In re Andersen, 179 F.3d 1253 (10th Cir. 1999) to support their position. If an objection to confirmation is raised by either the Trustee or the student loan creditor, the offending language is simply removed from the plan, and debtors are no worse off for their attempt. The Court will not permit this type of gamesmanship on the part of debtors and their counsel to continue. Conduct such as this has no place in the practice of bankruptcy law, and will not be tolerated by this Court.
  
  The citation of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit in Andersen, supra, as authority for the practice of intentionally inserting language in a chapter 13 plan that violates the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, and as authorizing counsel to stand by silently and thereby induce the Court to confirm a plan that contains a provision that counsel knows violates the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, is at once offensive and specious. Counsel appearing before this Court are officers of the Court and are ethically obligated to inform the Court if they are aware of the existence of a plan provision that renders the plan non- confirmable.
  
  Rather than recognizing their obligations to the Court and to opposing counsel, counsel for debtors in these cases go so far as to suggest that they are compelled by Andersen to recommend that their clients include these unlawful plan provisions, implying that their failure to do so might be an act of professional negligence. The Court does not believe that a fair reading of the opinion of the Tenth Circuit in Andersen can reasonably lead one to conclude that the Tenth Circuit intended to encourage the practice of intentionally inserting unlawful plan provisions in the hope that confirmation of the plan will occur and the time for appeal will pass before such provisions are noticed so that debtors and their counsel can then claim res judicata. Such a skewed reading of Andersen fails to account for the ethical obligations owed by members of the bar to the Court and to each other.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  This is particularly true given the volume of chapter 13 filings in this district, and the fact that the Court does not have the time to independently review every chapter 13 plan and confirmation order to determine whether an attempt to unlawfully discharge a student loan obligation is being made. Because the Court has apparently been unable to rely on the ethical conduct of some of the counsel representing chapter 13 debtors appearing before it, the Court, up to his point in time, has been forced to rely on a party in interest other than the debtor to point out those instances in which such student loan discharges have been attempted through plan provisions. Where the Court has become aware of such attempts, either through objections by the student loan creditor or through the inclusion of such a provision in the order confirming the chapter 13 plan, the Court has refused to confirm the plan containing such language, and has stricken language from confirmation orders attempting to effect a discharge of student loan indebtedness in this manner.
  
  . . .
  
  In light of the existing case law concerning the impropriety of the inclusion of such student loan discharge provisions in chapter 13 plans, and the unambiguous language of the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, the Court believes that the inclusion of such a provision in a chapter 13 plan and/or order confirming a chapter 13 plan is both unethical and sanctionable conduct pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9011. Bankruptcy Rule 9011(b) concerns representations made to the Court. It states that by presenting a paper to the Court, an attorney or unrepresented party certifies to the best of his or her knowledge, information and belief, formed after a reasonable inquiry under the circumstances, that the legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law. See FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(b)(2).
  
  . . .
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  The Court refuses to allow counsel for debtors to turn the inclusion of a student loan discharge provision in a chapter 13 plan into a "can’t lose" proposition. The Court therefore concludes that Andersen provides no protection from the imposition of sanctions under Rule 9011(b) in cases in
  
  Chapter 13
  which a student loan discharge provision is included in a confirmed chapter 13 plan.
  
  In re Hensley, 249 B.R. 318, 320-323 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 2000).
  
  C. Section 105
  
  11 U.S.C. § 105(a) states:
  1. The court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. No provision of this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary to enforce or implement court orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process.
  Resnick offers a single argument in support of his position that § 105(a) is inapplicable: that the provision only applies to violations of a specific court order. Resnick cites In re Dyer in support of this statement. 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir. 2003) ("Civil contempt authority allows a court to remedy a violation of a specific order (including ‘automatic’ orders, such as the automatic stay or discharge injunction).").
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Dyer does not explicitly state that § 105(a) is strictly limited to remedying violations of specific court orders, nor does it cite any authority from which it could be inferred that the Dyer court had such an opinion. Indeed § 105(a) explicitly mentions, in addition to court orders, rules and "abuse of process"; the latter might be invoked in the absence of a specific court order.
  
  The Supreme Court, on two occasions after Dyer, has written an opinion which indicates that § 105 is not strictly limited to correcting violations of specific court orders. First, in Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass., the Supreme Court wrote:
  
  On the contrary, the broad authority granted to bankruptcy judges to take any action that is necessary or appropriate to prevent an abuse of process described in § 105(a) of the Code, is surely adequate to authorize an immediate denial of a motion to convert filed under § 706 in lieu of a conversion order that merely postpones the allowance of equivalent relief and may provide a debtor with an opportunity to take action prejudicial to creditors.
  
  549 U.S. 365, 375 (2007) (footnote omitted). The "abuse of process" referenced in Marrama was not a violation of a specific court order, but, rather, "an unmeritorious attempt to qualify as a debtor under Chapter 13." Id.
  
  Second, in Law v. Siegel, the Supreme Court stated: "Section 105(a) confers authority to ‘carry out’ the provisions of the Code." This statement is natural, since the first sentence of § 105(a) states: "[t]he court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title."
  
  Here, the Court concludes that a specific and definite court order has not been violated. Nevertheless, the reconciliation of Dyer and Marrama helps illustrate the proper approach forward. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s instructions that
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  sanctions under § 105(a) are appropriate for violation of a specific and definite court order is derived from the non-bankruptcy standard for civil contempt. See F.T.C. v. Affordable Media, 179 F.3d 1228, 1239 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Stone v. City & Cnty. of S.F., 968 F.2d 850, 856 n.9 (9th Cir. 1992)) ("The moving party has the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that the contemnors violated a specific and definite order of the court. The burden then shifts to the contemnors to demonstrate why they were unable to comply."). Nevertheless, as illustrated by Marrama, the Court’s authority under § 105(a) is not strictly limited to issuing sanctions for civil contempt. While a civil contempt finding under § 105(a) may not be appropriate in these circumstances, it does not follow that the Court lacks the ability to adequately and equitably resolve this situation.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing for approximately thirty days to allow Debtors to file a supplemental brief addressing why they should not be sanctioned pursuant to the Court’s inherent sanctioning authority. No further briefing from Resnick is requested.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Brad Stoddard Represented By Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Deborah Ann Stoddard Represented By Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Brad Stoddard and Deborah Ann Stoddard
  
  Chapter 13
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  11:00 AM
  6:13-21098
  
  Monica Faye Wooley
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 CONT Order to Show Cause why Debtor should not be held in Contempt of Court for Violation of Turnover Order
  
  From: 12/13/17 EH
  Docket 47
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Monica Faye Wooley Represented By
  Filemon Kevin Samson III
  Trustee(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:13-26277
  
  Charles Frederick Biehl
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 Order to show cause re Civil Contempt EH
  Docket 234
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/21/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Charles Frederick Biehl Represented By
  Daryl L Binkley - DISBARRED - Steven L Bryson
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
  Leonard M Shulman
  11:00 AM
  6:16-13091
  
  Luz Ampelia Castro
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 50
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/14/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was okay.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 1,750.00 Trustee Expenses: $ 72.42
  
  Attorney Fees: $ 2,674.17 Attorney Costs: $ 325.83
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Luz Ampelia Castro Represented By George P Hobson Jr
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Luz Ampelia Castro
  
  Carmela Pagay
  
  Chapter 7
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20424
  
  LV Investments, LLC
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 Motion For Order Compelling Attorney To File Disclosure Of Compensation Pursuant To 11 U.S.C. § 329 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 2016
  
  EH
  
  Docket 9
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/14/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On December 21, 2017, LV Investments, LLC ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 8, 2018, the case was dismissed for failure to file case commencement documents.
  
  On January 17, 2018, UST filed a motion for an order compelling attorney to file disclosure of compensation pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 329. On January 22, 2018, Debtor’s attorney, Wayne Tucker, filed his disclosure of compensation for attorney.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  11 U.S.C. § 329(a) states:
  
  Any attorney representing a debtor in a case under this title, or in connection
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  LV Investments, LLC
  with such a case, whether or not such attorney applies for compensation under this title, shall file with the court a statement of the compensation paid or agreed to be paid, if such payment or agreement was made after one year before the date of the filing of the petition, for services rendered or to be rendered in contemplation of or in connection with the case by such attorney, and the source of such compensation.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 2016(b) provides further details regarding the requirements imposed by § 329. Here, Debtor’s counsel has failed to file the required disclosure of compensation. The Court has authority to enter an order directing the disclosure of such compensation, and will routinely direct Debtor’s counsel to file the required disclosure. See, e.g., In re Shuma, 124 B.R. 668, 677 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1991).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  It appears that Debtor’s attorney filed the Statement of Attorney Compensation. Therefore, it appears that the matter is MOOT. Pending UST’s review of the disclosure of compensation, the Court will retain jurisdiction over matters related to 11 U.S.C. § 329.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  LV Investments, LLC Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
  Abram Feuerstein esq
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  LV Investments, LLC
  
  Chapter 7
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Motion for extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge EH
  Docket 82
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/14/18
  BACKGROUND
  On April 4, 2017, William & Shawna Mendez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 12, 2017, the Court approved the stipulation of Trustee and Debtors to extend the deadline to file a complaint objecting to discharge until September 1, 2017. On August 23, 2017, Trustee filed a motion for extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge. On September 15, 2017, the Court granted Trustee’s motion extending the deadline to object to Debtors’ discharge until October 16, 2017. Afterwards, Trustee and Debtors entered into two stipulations further extending the deadline for Trustee or UST to file a complaint objecting to discharge. The second stipulation imposed a deadline of January 19, 2018. On January 19, 2018, UST filed a motion for a further extension on the basis that Debtors have not yet provided adequate financial records.
  DISCUSSION
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(a) states:
  1. In a chapter 7 case, a complaint, or a motion under § 727(a)(8) or (9) of the Code, objecting to the debtor’s discharge shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). In a
  11:00 AM
  CONT... William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez Chapter 7
  chapter 11 case, the complaint shall be filed no later than the first date set
  for the hearing on confirmation. In a chapter 13 case, a motion objecting to the debtor’s discharge under § 1328(f) shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). At least 28 days’ notice of the time so fixed shall be given to the United States trustee and all creditors as provided in Rule 2002(f) and (k) and to the trustee and the trustee’s attorney.
  
  And FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(b) states:
  1. On motion of any party in interest, after notice and hearing, the court may for cause extend the time to object to discharge. Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2), the motion shall be filed before the time has expired.
  2. A motion to extent the time to object to discharge may be filed after the time for objection has expired and before discharge is granted if (A) the objection is based on facts that, if learned after the discharge, would provide a basis for revocation under § 727(d) of the Code, and (B) the movant did not have knowledge of those facts in time to permit an objection. The motion shall be filed promptly after the movant discovers the facts on which the objection is based.
  Here, Debtor’s delay in providing the requested information constitutes sufficient cause to extend the deadline. See COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 4004.03[2] (16th ed. 2013) ("A debtor’s delays in responding to discovery may be sufficient cause.
  Obviously, a delay in the meeting of creditors to a date close to or after the deadline may constitute such cause.") (citing In re McCormack, 244 B.R. 203 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2000)).
  
  Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose may be deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
  
  Chapter 7
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  11:00 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Second Joint Motion and Moving Memorandum by Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation for Order Approving Settlement between Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation
  
  Also #8 EH
  Docket 521
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/28/18 AT 11:00 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Movant(s):
  Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #8.00 CONT Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 between Trustee and Dr. Eric L. Freedman
  
  From: 5/11/16, 6/8/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 10/5/16, 11/9/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17
  
  Also #7 EH
  Docket 322
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/11/2016
  
  Based on the representations made to the Court by counsel for the Parties that negotiations are ongoing, and based on the consent of the Parties to a continuance, the Court shall CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to June 8, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
  
  APPEARANCES ARE WAIVED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01303 Cisneros v. AMERICAN EXPRESS
  
  #9.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01303. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against AMERICAN EXPRESS. (Charge To Estate $350). For Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17 9/13/17, 12/13/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  AMERICAN EXPRESS Represented By Robert S Lampl Chad V Haes
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation
  
  #10.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC CORPORATION, a California corporation, UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
  Summer M Shaw George Hanover
  LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By Summer M Shaw
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  George Hanover
  
  Chapter 7
  UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By Summer M Shaw George Hanover
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01308 Cisneros v. BWI CONSULTING, LLC et al
  
  #11.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01308. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against BWI CONSULTING, LLC, Black and White, Inc., BLACK AND WHITE BILLING COMPANY, BLACK AND WHITE INK, MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 7/27/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  BWI CONSULTING, LLC Pro Se
  Black and White, Inc. Pro Se
  BLACK AND WHITE BILLING Pro Se
  BLACK AND WHITE INK Pro Se
  MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01309 Cisneros v. DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN
  
  #12.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01309. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential Transfer (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/2017
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. Represented By
  Summer M Shaw
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:17-14228
  
  Michelle Meredith
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01196 Grobstein, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Polacek, as Trustee of the Margaret J. Heath
  
  #13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [3] Amended Complaint First Amended Complaint for: (1) Declaratory Relief; (2) Accounting; and (3) Turnover of Property of the Estate by Noreen A Madoyan on behalf of Howard B Grobstein, Chapter 7 Trustee against Sharon Polacek, as Trustee of the Margaret J. Heath Revocable Living Trust, 2002, Amended July 1, 2016, or any successor Trustee. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:17-ap-01196. Complaint by Howard B Grobstein, Chapter 7 Trustee against Sharon Polacek, as Trustee of the Margaret J. Heath Revocable Living Trust, 2002, Amended July 1, 2016, or any successor Trustee. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for: (1) Declaratory Relief; (2) Accounting; and (3) Turnover of Property of the Estate (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)) (Madoyan, Noreen) Modified on 9/15/2017. filed by Plaintiff Howard B Grobstein, Chapter 7 Trustee). (Madoyan, Noreen)
  
  From: 11/15/17 EH
  Docket 3
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 1/8/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michelle Meredith Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Defendant(s):
  Sharyn Polacek, as Trustee of the Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Howard B Grobstein, Chapter 7 Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Michelle Meredith
  
  Noreen A Madoyan
  
  Chapter 7
  Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By Noreen A Madoyan
  2:00 PM
  6:14-14377
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01206 Speier v. Simmons et al
  
  #14.00 CONT Pre-Trial Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01206. Complaint by Steven M Speier against Angela Simmons, David Schanhals, Hilary D Hill
  
  FROM: 12/13/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Defendant(s):
  Angela Simmons Represented By David Brian Lally
  David Schanhals Represented By David Brian Lally
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  David Brian Lally
  Plaintiff(s):
  Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Donald Reid
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  Elizabeth A LaRocque
  2:00 PM
  6:14-14377
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01190 Speier v. U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Managem
  
  #15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01190. Complaint by Steven M Speier against U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management, Hilary D Hill. (Charge To Estate- $350.00). Complaint for Declaratory Relief re Alter Ego Liability of the Marion Newhall Hill Trust Nature of Suit: (71 (Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay))
  
  From: 11/8/17 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Defendant(s):
  U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Represented By
  Benjamin Nachimson
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  David Brian Lally
  Plaintiff(s):
  Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Donald Reid
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  Elizabeth A LaRocque
  2:00 PM
  6:13-30477
  
  Master Design Inc
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01370 Speier v. Test-Rite Products Corp. et al
  
  #16.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Steven M Speier against Test-Rite Products Corp., Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Ltd., Test-Rite International Co. Ltd., Judy Lee, Chester Lee, Christina Ma. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code3
  § 3439.04(a)(1) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (2) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (3) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05 and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (4) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (5) Conversion; (6) Unlawful Payment of Dividends; (7) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Officer; (8) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Controlling Shareholder; and (9) Declaratory Relief as to Alter Ego Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 3/2/16, 4/6/16, 4/27/16, 6/29/16, 7/20/16, 8/3/16, 9/28/16, 11/9/16, 3/29/17, 8/2/17, 11/8/17, 1/10/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/11/18 AT 2:00 PM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
  Defendant(s):
  Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Master Design Inc
  
  Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
  
  Chapter 7
  Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Represented By
  Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig
  Test-Rite International Co. Ltd. Represented By Julie A Garcia Aaron S Craig Joon M Khang John Y Kim Brian Wheeler
  Chester Lee Represented By
  Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
  Christina Ma Represented By
  Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
  Test-Rite International (US) Co. Ltd. Represented By
  Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
  Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Master Design Inc
  
  John Y Kim Aaron S Craig
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
  12:30 PM
  6:14-21228
  
  Roy Kenneth Scott and Tashiea Scott
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss or Convert to Chapter 13 From: 1/11/18
  EH
  
  Docket 93
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/15/2018
  The Court finds that provision 3.d.3. of the "order confirming plan which provides that the plan is modified to comply with the requirements of the court's approved plan form" implicitly incorporates the provision of the form plan which requires debtors to remain current as to postpetition taxes. Thus, based on the failure to remain current postpetition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and dismiss the case.
  Additionally, the Debtors, though properly served, have failed to file opposition. As such they are deemed to consent to the granting of the Motion pursuant to LBR 9013- 1(h).
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Roy Kenneth Scott Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tashiea Scott Represented By
  Sunita N Sood
  Movant(s):
  California Franchise Tax Board Represented By Brian D Wesley
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Roy Kenneth Scott and Tashiea Scott
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-20219
  
  Robert Ibay Orina and Emmyruth Amizola Orina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
  Docket 51
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/15/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On November 17, 2016, Robert and Emmyruth Orina (collectively, the "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtors’ chapter 13 plan was confirmed on January 31, 2017. The case was dismissed on December 4, 2017, after the Debtors failed to file opposition or response to a Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to make plan payments.
  
  On January 11, 2018, the Debtors filed a Motion to Vacate Dismissal ("Motion"). The Motion indicates that the Debtors fell behind because of a reduction in work hours. The Debtors indicate they now have the funds to cure the delinquency of $4,905.79. However, the Trustee in his comments indicates that by the date of the hearing the delinquency of the Debtors will have increased to $12,246.79. Moreover, the Court notes that there was no effort by the Debtors to oppose the Motion and seek suspension of payments via a Motion to Modify prior to the dismissal when the alleged reduction in pay occurred.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Robert Ibay Orina and Emmyruth Amizola Orina
  
  Chapter 13
  Robert Ibay Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Emmyruth Amizola Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Movant(s):
  Robert Ibay Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Emmyruth Amizola Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19565
  
  Cynthia Ramos
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 12/21/17
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Cynthia Ramos Represented By Hayk Grigoryan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20121
  
  Agustin Napolion Joya and Dora Maria Joya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 2/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Agustin Napolion Joya Represented By Daniel King
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Dora Maria Joya Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20136
  
  Marco Alberto Flores
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marco Alberto Flores Represented By Rhonda Walker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20147
  
  Gilbert Richard Enriquez and Lisa Lynn Enriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gilbert Richard Enriquez Represented By
  Raj T Wadhwani
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Lynn Enriquez Represented By
  Raj T Wadhwani
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20177
  
  Randal Scott Oakley and Christine Ann Oakley
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Randal Scott Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Christine Ann Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20183
  
  Margaret Henson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Margaret Henson Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20187
  
  Michael Adam Moore
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael Adam Moore Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20231
  
  Nicholas Anthony Parisi
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Nicholas Anthony Parisi Jr Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20240
  
  Natona Smith and Tameiko Smith
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Natona Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tameiko Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20260
  
  Ana M Orozco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ana M Orozco Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20277
  
  Christina Irene Dillon
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Christina Irene Dillon Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20319
  
  Marc Burns
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Marc Burns Represented By
  Stuart R Simone
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20336
  
  John Martin Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/11/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John Martin Martinez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20349
  
  John Henry Vasquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  John Henry Vasquez Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20377
  
  Deborah L Tafolla
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Deborah L Tafolla Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20382
  
  Raymond Ballejos and Veronica Ballejos
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Raymond Ballejos Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Veronica Ballejos Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20434
  
  Michelle Singleton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michelle Singleton Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20459
  
  Elmy Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Elmy Martinez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20473
  
  Felipe Gerardo
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Felipe Gerardo Represented By Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10414
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.10 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14785 Alba Way Moreno Valley, CA 92553
  
  MOVANT: LEONEL VILLA & LUCILA PINEDA
  
  From: 2/13/18 EH
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  The prior case was dismissed on recommendation of the chapter 13 trustee because the Debtors failed to appear at the 341(a) meeting of creditors, failed to tender the November plan payment, and failed to account for the postpetition mortgage payment for November.
  
  At the confirmation hearing on November 16, 2017, the Debtor’s appearance counsel indicated that the Debtors had to travel to Mexico for a family emergency. The Debtor’s declaration in support of the Motion reiterates this assertion. However, the attached booking confirmation indicates a return trip on Tuesday, November 7, 2017 (over a week prior to the 341(a) meeting of creditors held on November 16, 2017).
  This discrepancy is not explained by the Debtors. Nor did the Debtors address the failure to tender a November plan payment or to account for their November 2017 mortgage payment – which were two other bases for dismissal.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Chapter 13
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lucila Pineda Represented By Luis G Torres
  Movant(s):
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres Luis G Torres Luis G Torres
  Lucila Pineda Represented By Luis G Torres Luis G Torres Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-20022
  
  Encarnacion Iniguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 61
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  2/8/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Encarnacion Iniguez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-15453
  
  Brenda Fleming Bell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) From: 12/21/17
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Brenda Fleming Bell Represented By Thomas Watkins
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-17855
  
  Arthur Leo Gent and Wanda Sue Gent
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 44
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Arthur Leo Gent Represented By April E Roberts
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Wanda Sue Gent Represented By April E Roberts
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-18820
  
  Chase D Chung
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 47
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Chase D Chung Represented By Daniel C Sever
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-19656
  
  Jerome D Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 54
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jerome D Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-10040
  
  Tracie Cornett-Martin
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 37
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/17/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tracie Cornett-Martin Represented By Nathan Fransen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-17241
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  9:30 AM
  6:14-13046
  
  Allen Dale Sanderson
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01116 Verbree v. Sanderson
  
  #1.00 Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01116. Complaint by Margaret Verbree against Allen Dale Sanderson. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)) (Madoni, Stephen)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: JUDGMENT ENTERED 2/13/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Allen Dale Sanderson Represented By
  Robert K McKernan
  Defendant(s):
  Allen Dale Sanderson Represented By
  Robert K McKernan
  Plaintiff(s):
  Margaret Verbree Represented By Stephen A Madoni
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17137
  
  Ricks Patio, Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #2.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Approval of Stipulations Regarding Debtor's Use of Cash Collateral
  
  From: 10/5/17, 11/14/17, 2/13/18 EH
  Docket 32
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/20/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10381
  
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #2.10 Motion to extend Automatic Stay or in the Alternative to Impose a Stay (Warren, Odeha)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Represented By Odeha L Warren
  Movant(s):
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Represented By Odeha L Warren
  3:00 PM
  6:16-16720
  
  Luevina Henry
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al
  
  #3.00 Motion to Reconsideration and Objection re: Judge Mark D. Houle's "Order Denying Motion for Disqualification against Bankruptcy Judge Meredith A. Jury filed and entered January 09, 2016
  
  EH
  
  Docket 94
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Luevina Henry Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Defendant(s):
  Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker
  THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker
  Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel
  Tavares Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Luevina Henry Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Luevina Henry Pro Se
  3:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Luevina Henry
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  3:00 PM
  6:17-19936
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #4.00 Order setting hearing on an emergency basis for (1) Motion to dismiss/convert case; and (2) Motion for relief from automatic stay
  
  Also #5 EH
  Docket 141
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  3:00 PM
  6:17-19936
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #5.00 Emergency motion to Approve Cash Collateral Expenditure Outside of Budget and Approve Debtor in Possession Financing of Annual Insurance Premiums
  
  Also #4 EH
  Docket 147
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  
  Wednesday, February 21, 2018
  Hearing Room
  303
  
  9:30 AM
  6:14-13046
  
  Allen Dale Sanderson
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01116 Verbree v. Sanderson
  
  #1.00 CONT Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01116. Complaint by Margaret Verbree against Allen Dale Sanderson. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)) (Madoni, Stephen)
  
  From: 2/20/18 EH
  Docket 1
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Allen Dale Sanderson Represented By
  Robert K McKernan
  Defendant(s):
  Allen Dale Sanderson Represented By
  Robert K McKernan
  Plaintiff(s):
  Margaret Verbree Represented By Stephen A Madoni
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:15-14501
  
  Vonetta M Mays
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  Also #2 & #3 EH
  Docket 169
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:15-14501
  
  Vonetta M Mays
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion to Disallow Claims No 1 with Oakview Homeowners Association Also #1 & #3
  EH
  
  Docket 170
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:15-14501
  
  Vonetta M Mays
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Also #1 & #2
  EH
  
  Docket 168
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-13716
  
  Deborah D. Pierce
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Motion for Authority to Obtain Secured Post-Petition Financing to Purchase Real Property (Principal Residence)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppoistion is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Deborah D. Pierce Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Movant(s):
  Deborah D. Pierce Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-16909
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Application for Compensation Amended with proof of service for Dana Travis, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $560.00, Expenses: $.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 143
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Movant(s):
  Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19892
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Motion to Value Personal Property Re: 2014 Volkswagen Tiguan Also #7
  EH
  
  Docket 20
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Movant(s):
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19892
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  Also #6 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  2/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 29, 2017, Lena Wade ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition and plan. On December 28, 2017, Debtor filed an amended plan. On January 11, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to confirmation. Among the grounds listed in Trustee’s objection was that confirmation should contain a condition that prohibited Debtor from modifying the plan to pay less than 100% to unsecured creditors unless Debtor paid all disposable income into the plan. On January 25, 2018, Debtor filed her opposition to Trustee’s objection. On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a reply brief.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Trustee requests that this Court adopt the holding of In re McCarthy, 554 B.R. 388 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2016). The Court declines to do so for the reasons that follow.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) enumerates plan confirmation requirements. If the confirmation requirements are satisfied then "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm [the] plan." Id. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) states:
  
  (b)(1) If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan ---
  1. the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or
  2. the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan.
  Subject to the discussion below, for the sake of analysis, the Court will assume § 1325(b)(1) is applicable here. Trustee argues in section II.D of its brief that once
  § 1325(b)(1) is invoked, confirmation is discretionary:
  
  However, the language in § 1325(b) is permissive and, therefore, more discretionary – "the court MAY not confirm unless . . ." Therefore, debtor’s argument that the court MUST confirm the plan because it meets the requirements of § 1325 is not supported by the language of the statute. In fact, the Chapter 13 Trustee would argue that it is the discretionary language of
  § 1325(b)(1) that allows the court, under its equitable powers, to order a conditional confirmation as the court did in McCarthy.
  
  [Dkt. No. 24, pg. 10, lines 1-8] (parenthesis omitted) (italicization added for emphasis). Trustee’s assertion that the language of § 1325(b) is permissive and discretionary, however, is statutorily incorrect. 11 U.S.C. § 102(4) states: "’may not’ is prohibitive, and not permissive." As a result, the foundation of Trustee’s position appears to rest on a misreading of the statute.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Instead, the Code provides for the following analysis at plan confirmation: (1) if the debtor has satisfied the § 1325(a) confirmation requirements and no objection is received, then the Court must confirm the plan; (2) if an objection is received and the debtor has not satisfied § 1325(b)(1), the Court cannot confirm the plan; and (3) if an objection is received and the debtor has satisfied § 1325(a)-(b)(1), then the Court must confirm the plan. See, e.g., 8 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.11[e] (16th ed. 2016) ("If an objection to confirmation is filed under section 1325(b)(1), the objection must be denied when ‘the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim.’ . . . [I]f the plan provides that the claims are to be paid in full, the trustee cannot demand that the debtors devote all of their projected disposable income each month to payment of claims in order to pay them more quickly.").
  
  Even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination by the Court, the nature of the objection filed by Trustee is inadequate to invoke the § 1325(b)(1) requirements. See, e.g., In re Torres, 193 B.R. 319, 322-23 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1996) ("in order for that subsection [§1325(b)(1)(B)] to become applicable to confirmation, an objection to confirmation must be made alleging that a debtor is not devoting all disposable income to the plan for a minimum period of three years."). As a result, even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination, the standard would be irrelevant in this case.
  
  Apart from the statutory interpretations problems with the Trustee’s argument, the Court finds that policy and equitable considerations weigh against Trustee’s position. The Court notes that the disposable income requirement is disjunctive: either the debtor must pledge all disposable income to the plan or the debtor must pay unsecured creditors in full. The Trustee does not dispute that Debtor has satisfied the disjunctive test.
  
  Ultimately, the Trustee relies upon the Court’s § 105 equitable powers in support of the request at issue. Rarely will it be the case, however, that the equities will in favor of creating a fixed rule binding for years regardless of changes in circumstances. The review of a proposed plan modification is generally a highly equitable endeavor that
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  emphasizes the totality of the circumstances. Replacing that equitable analysis with a rigid rule not provided for by the Code is simply inequitable.
  
  The Court does agree, however, that a plan term requiring Debtors in a 100% plan to have to account for excess disposable income, in the even they later file a motion to modify, is of benefit.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19894
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  2/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 29, 2017, William & Carla Walker ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On December 7, 2017, Debtors filed a Chapter 13 plan. On January 11, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to confirmation. Among the grounds listed in Trustee’s objection was that confirmation should contain a condition that prohibited Debtors from modifying the plan to pay less than 100% to unsecured creditors unless Debtor paid all disposable income into the plan. On January 25, 2018, Debtors filed their opposition to Trustee’s objection. On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a reply brief.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Trustee requests that this Court adopt the holding of In re McCarthy, 554 B.R. 388 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2016). The Court declines to do so for the reasons that follow.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) enumerates plan confirmation requirements. If the confirmation requirements are satisfied then "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm [the] plan." Id. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) states:
  
  (b)(1) If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan ---
  1. the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or
  2. the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan.
  Subject to the discussion below, for the sake of analysis, the Court will assume § 1325(b)(1) is applicable here. Trustee argues in section II.D of its brief that once
  § 1325(b)(1) is invoked, confirmation is discretionary:
  
  However, the language in § 1325(b) is permissive and, therefore, more discretionary – "the court MAY not confirm unless . . ." Therefore, debtor’s argument that the court MUST confirm the plan because it meets the requirements of § 1325 is not supported by the language of the statute. In fact, the Chapter 13 Trustee would argue that it is the discretionary language of
  § 1325(b)(1) that allows the court, under its equitable powers, to order a conditional confirmation as the court did in McCarthy.
  
  [Dkt. No. 24, pg. 10, lines 1-8] (parenthesis omitted) (italicization added for emphasis). Trustee’s assertion that the language of § 1325(b) is permissive and discretionary, however, is statutorily incorrect. 11 U.S.C. § 102(4) states: "’may not’ is prohibitive, and not permissive." As a result, the foundation of Trustee’s position appears to rest on a misreading of the statute.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Instead, the Code provides for the following analysis at plan confirmation: (1) if the debtor has satisfied the § 1325(a) confirmation requirements and no objection is received, then the Court must confirm the plan; (2) if an objection is received and the debtor has not satisfied § 1325(b)(1), the Court cannot confirm the plan; and (3) if an objection is received and the debtor has satisfied § 1325(a)-(b)(1), then the Court must confirm the plan. See, e.g., 8 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.11[e] (16th ed. 2016) ("If an objection to confirmation is filed under section 1325(b)(1), the objection must be denied when ‘the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim.’ . . . [I]f the plan provides that the claims are to be paid in full, the trustee cannot demand that the debtors devote all of their projected disposable income each month to payment of claims in order to pay them more quickly.").
  
  Even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination by the Court, the nature of the objection filed by Trustee is inadequate to invoke the § 1325(b)(1) requirements. See, e.g., In re Torres, 193 B.R. 319, 322-23 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1996) ("in order for that subsection [§1325(b)(1)(B)] to become applicable to confirmation, an objection to confirmation must be made alleging that a debtor is not devoting all disposable income to the plan for a minimum period of three years."). As a result, even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination, the standard would be irrelevant in this case.
  
  Apart from the statutory interpretations problems with the Trustee’s argument, the Court finds that policy and equitable considerations weigh against Trustee’s position. The Court notes that the disposable income requirement is disjunctive: either the debtor must pledge all disposable income to the plan or the debtor must pay unsecured creditors in full. The Trustee does not dispute that Debtor has satisfied the disjunctive test.
  
  Ultimately, the Trustee relies upon the Court’s § 105 equitable powers in support of the request at issue. Rarely will it be the case, however, that the equities will in favor of creating a fixed rule binding for years regardless of changes in circumstances. The review of a proposed plan modification is generally a highly equitable endeavor that
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  emphasizes the totality of the circumstances. Replacing that equitable analysis with a rigid rule not provided for by the Code is simply inequitable.
  
  The Court does agree, however, that a plan term requiring Debtors in a 100% plan to have to account for excess disposable income, in the even they later file a motion to modify, is of benefit.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Edward Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carla Sue Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19942
  
  Mark Miller
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mark Miller Represented By
  Bruce A Boice
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20372
  
  Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York Serviced by Specialized Loan Servicing LLC
  
  Also #11 EH
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/22/18
  
  The Court has reviewed the motion and finding good cause, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of The Bank of New York Mellon upon receipt of a Chapter 13 discharge.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Anna C. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  George E. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Movant(s):
  Anna C. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  George E. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20372
  
  Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #10 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anna C. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  George E. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20388
  
  Oracio Rosales Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Oracio Rosales Hernandez Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20395
  
  John Henry Washington, Jr and Carolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  John Henry Washington Jr Represented By Jeffrey N Wishman
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carolyn Washington Represented By Jeffrey N Wishman
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20444
  
  Michael Phillip Young
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/8/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michael Phillip Young Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-25336
  
  Enrique Artemio Barba
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/25/18
  EH
  
  Docket 150
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Enrique Artemio Barba Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-15522
  
  Scott Allan Oswald and Lisa Frances Oswald
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/25/18
  EH
  
  Docket 78
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Scott Allan Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Frances Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-11794
  
  ROBERT A HAGUE and DIANNE L HAGUE
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 96
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  ROBERT A HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
  Joint Debtor(s):
  DIANNE L HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-19967
  
  Jeremy Joseph Salas and Ronda-Sue Alice Marie Salas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 53
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 1/31/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jeremy Joseph Salas Represented By Robert W Ripley
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ronda-Sue Alice Marie Salas Represented By Robert W Ripley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-17241
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/15/18
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  1:00 PM
  6:16-16362
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Motion to vacate dismissal order dated 10/12/16 for this case to allow an objection to the proof of claim filed with this court; request for injunction and TRO
  
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/22/2018
  BACKGROUND:
  On July 18, 2016, Conchita Ang ("Debtor") filed for chapter 13 relief. Rod Danielson is the duly appointed chapter 13 trustee ("Trustee").
  
  On October 12, 2016, the Court granted the Motion of the United States Trustee to dismiss the Debtor’s case with a re-filing bar, thereby dismissing the Debtor’s case (the "Dismissal Order")
  
  The Debtor subsequently appealed the dismissal of the case to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the "BAP"). On August 10, 2017, the BAP affirmed the order of this Court dismissing the Debtor’s case as a bad faith filing.
  
  On February 1, 2018, the Debtor filed a Motion to Vacate the Dismissal Order (the "Motion"). On February 5, 2018, the Trustee filed comments recommending that the Court deny the Debtor’s Motion.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW: FRBP 9024, FRCP 60(b)
  
  DISCUSSION:
  Under FRBP 9024 (incorporating FRCP 60(b)), a court may relieve a party from judgment for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) fraud or other misconduct; (4) a
  1:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  void judgment; (5) a satisfied or discharged judgment; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from operation of judgment. FRBP 9024.
  
  The Debtor does not specify under which subsection of Rule 60(b) she is moving. However, the allegations in the Motion appear to indicate that the Debtor believes fraud has occurred as to "alleged creditors" Wells Fargo Bank and Clear Recon Corp. Fraud falls within Rule 60(b)(3). Potentially, the Debtor is also alleging that relief is justified based on new evidence discovered during the appeal process which would fall under Rule 60(b)(2). (Motion at ¶5).
  
  As a threshold matter, pursuant to Rule 60(c), a motion under Rule 60(b) that is brought for reasons (1), (2), or (3) cannot be brought more than a year after the entry of the order. FRCP 60(c). Here, more than one year has elapsed since the Dismissal Order was entered on October 12, 2016. Therefore, based on the allegations in the Motion, 60(b)(6) appears to be the only grounds upon which the Dismissal Order could be set aside.
  
  The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 60(b)(6) should be used sparingly as an equitable remedy to prevent manifest injustice and is to be utilized only where extraordinary circumstances prevented a party from taking timely action to prevent or correct an erroneous judgment. In re International Fibercom, Inc., 503 F.3d 933, 941 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted). Accordingly, a party who moves for such relief "must demonstrate both injury and circumstances beyond his control that prevented him from proceeding with ... the action in a proper fashion. Id.
  
  Here, the Debtor has failed to either (1) demonstrate manifest injustice, or (2) to demonstrate what extraordinary circumstances prevented her from bringing this Motion at an earlier junction. Instead, the timing of the instant Motion appears more likely to reflect the Debtor’s refusal to accept the ruling of the BAP which affirmed this Court’s Dismissal Order. Further, as pointed out by the Trustee, the Debtor’s Motion fails to address the numerous grounds for dismissal delineated in the Court’s Dismissal Order, including the lack of disposable income to fund a chapter 13 plan and the Debtor’s history of skeletal filings. Finally, the Debtor believes she should have an opportunity to object to proofs of claim filed in her dismissed case. However, there is no explanation or averment as to how a proof of claim filed in a dismissed case has caused or is causing injury to the Debtor.
  1:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  
  In sum, while the Debtor believes she has meritorious grounds for alleging fraud against the "alleged creditors", the Motion fails to demonstrate that the bankruptcy court is the appropriate forum for the Debtor to litigate these disputes with the creditors given that the Debtor’s case has been dismissed and that no evidence has been provided to warrant reinstating the bankruptcy case.
  
  Separately, the Motion appears to seek the issuance of a temporary restraining order. However, LBR 7065 clearly states that a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction may only be sought as a provision remedy in an adversary proceeding.
  
  In addition to the foregoing, the Court also denies the Motion on the basis of improper service because the Debtor has failed to serve the Motion in accordance with FRBP 7004 as to the alleged creditors.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING:
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Motion is DENIED in its entirety.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-18182
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
  
  #21.00 OSC why case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Defendant(s):
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
  Jose Pastora Represented By
  Andrew L Leff
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Michael J Hemming
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:14-21370
  
  Imelda Tapia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 25905 Floyd Avenue, Romoland, CA 92585
  
  MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
  
  EH
  
  Docket 70
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Imelda Tapia Represented By
  Anthony Wilaras
  Movant(s):
  The Bank of New York Mellon FKA Represented By
  Mark S Krause
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-13752
  
  Catalina Smith
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 16227 Miller Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336.
  
  MOVANT: US ROF II/BANK NATIONAL ASSOC
  
  From: 1/23/18 EH
  Docket 44
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Movant to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Catalina Smith Represented By Luis G Torres
  Movant(s):
  U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
  Megan E Lees
  U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
  Megan E Lees Alexander K Lee Jamie D Hanawalt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Catalina Smith
  
  Armin M Kolenovic
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-14835
  
  Bennea Cynthia Travis
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 NISSAN MAXIMA, VIN # 1N4AA5AP2EC437908
  
  MOVANT: REGIONAL ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 69
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bennea Cynthia Travis Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Movant(s):
  REGIONAL ACCEPTANCE Represented By
  Michael D Vanlochem
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Bennea Cynthia Travis
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14440
  
  Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15605 Esther St., Chino Hills CA 91709
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
  
  From: 1/23/18 EH
  Docket 50
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/23/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Movant to confirm that Debtors have cured arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
  Movant(s):
  The Bank of New York Mellon FKA Represented By
  Mark D Estle
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-15670
  
  Graciela N Pedroza
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 10994 Evergreen Loop, Corona, CA 92883
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Graciela N Pedroza Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
  Aaron R Anglin Jennifer C Wong
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-16909
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT P/U 4D 5 3/4
  
  MOVANT: BALBOA THRIFT & LOAN
  
  EH
  
  Docket 140
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions, if any.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Movant(s):
  Balboa Thrift & Loan Represented By Keith E Herron
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-19018
  
  Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 23305 Spring Meadow Drive Murrieta California
  
  MOVANT: REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS, INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 34
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Subject to discussion regarding Debtor’s late opposition, based on failure to pay real property taxes accruing postpetition on reverse mortgage, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1), GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay, GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz Represented By
  Danny K Agai
  Movant(s):
  Reverse Mortgage Solutions Inc Represented By Madison C Wilson Sean C Ferry
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11131
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 935 Goldenrod St., Corona, CA 92882
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  From: 1/9/18 EH
  Docket 31
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/10/18 AT 10:00 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Limited
  
  Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions, and Debtors to explain why evidence that they are current was not attached to motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  Brandye N Foreman John Tamburo
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-14588
  
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Toyota Corolla VIN: 5YFBURHE1HP579809
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC
  
  From: 1/9/18, 1/23/18 EH
  Docket 24
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/15/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the § 1301(a) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17316
  
  Luis Fernando Montoya, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Harley-Davidson XL 1200CX Roadster
  
  MOVANT: HARLEY-DAVIDSON CREDIT CORP
  
  EH
  
  Docket 48
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Luis Fernando Montoya Jr. Represented By Anthony B Vigil
  Movant(s):
  Harley-Davidson Credit Corp as Represented By
  Austin P Nagel
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18877
  
  Fernando Macias Perez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 61058 29 Palms Highway Joshua Tree CA 92252
  
  MOVANT: JAMES TANGLER
  
  Also #12 EH
  Docket 25
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 2/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Fernando Macias Perez Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Movant(s):
  James Tangler Represented By Neil B Katz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18877
  
  Fernando Macias Perez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2008 VOLVO S40
  
  MOVANT: WESTLAKE FINANCIAL SERVICES
  
  Also #11 EH
  Docket 28
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Fernando Macias Perez Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Movant(s):
  Westlake Financial Services Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Fernando Macias Perez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20009
  
  Shawn M Orms and Karishea Tranell Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 DODGE Charger Sedan 4D SE V6
  
  MOVANT: BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 9
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  1. and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Shawn M Orms Represented By Neil R Hedtke
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Karishea Tranell Jones Represented By Neil R Hedtke
    Movant(s):
    BMW Financial Services NA, LLC Represented By
    Bret D. Allen
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Shawn M Orms and Karishea Tranell Jones
    
    Chapter 7
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-20535
    
    Antonio Ochoa
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #14.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1860 Chicago Ave, Ste G-20, Riverside CA 92507
    
    MOVANT: JS MCA HUNTER PARK LP
    
    CASE DISMISSED 1/9/18
    
    From: 1/23/18 EH
    Docket 15
    *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
    2/9/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    1/23/2018
    
    Service is Improper Opposition: None
    
    Pursuant to Local Rule 4001-1(c)(1)(C), motions for relief from the automatic stay must be served on the debtor. Here, Movant did not serve the motion on Debtor.
    Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to February 27, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. for Movant to file and serve the motion and notice of continued hearing and opportunity to object on Debtor.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Antonio Ochoa Represented By
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Movant(s):
    
    Antonio Ochoa
    
    Qais Zafari
    
    Chapter 13
    JS MCA Hunter Park LP Represented By Nicholas Firetag
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10741
    
    Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #15.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 43465 Corte Barbaste Temecula, 92592
    
    MOVANT: SANTIAGO AND SHALLEE ANONICAL
    
    EH
    
    Docket 13
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/2018
    
    Prior to the instant case, Debtor most recent bankruptcy case (16-10269) was dismissed on November 17, 2016. 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3) only applies if the debtor had a case pending in the previous year. A case that has been dismissed but has not yet been administratively closed is not pending. See, e.g., In re Moore, 337 B.R. 79,
    80-81 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2005). The instant case was filed on January 31, 2018. Therefore, the Court will DENY the motion as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Movant(s):
    Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical
    Todd L Turoci
    
    Chapter 13
    Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10841
    
    Theresa Susanne Ysiano
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #16.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate
    
    MOVANT: THERESA SUSANNE YSIANO
    
    EH
    
    Docket 7
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/2018
    
    The Court has reviewed the motion and good cause appearing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINUING the automatic stay as to all creditors.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Theresa Susanne Ysiano Represented By William J Howell
    Movant(s):
    Theresa Susanne Ysiano Represented By William J Howell
    Trustee(s):
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10871
    
    Francisco Javier Martinez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #17.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property located 27649 Sonora Circle, Temecula, CA 92591
    
    MOVANT: FRANCISCO JAVIER MARTINEZ
    
    EH
    
    Docket 21
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/2018
    
    The Court has reviewed the motion and good cause appearing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINUING the automatic stay as to all creditors.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
    Movant(s):
    Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10951
    
    Bobby Joe Jackson, Jr
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 521 N. Oakdale Ave., Rialto, CA 92376
    
    MOVANT: 2017-1 IH BORROWER L.P.
    
    EH
    
    Docket 8
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/2018
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Bobby Joe Jackson Jr Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    2017-1 IH BORROWER L.P. Represented By Scott Andrews
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11080
    
    Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #19.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY (Real Property: located at 970 Winston Circle, Corona CA 92881)
    
    MOVANT: EDGARDO ARANDA AND KELLEY ARANDA
    
    EH
    
    Docket 13
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/2018
    
    The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. The Court finds that Debtors have not provided clear and convincing evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption arising under § 362(c)(3)(C) that this case was not filed in good faith. Specifically, the motion does not address the reasons the previous case was dismissed. Instead the motion and Debtor’s declaration repeatedly recite that the Debtors are willing and able to make their plan payment without any specificity or detail being provided.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Paul Lee to personally appear.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
    Movant(s):
    Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
    
    Paul Y Lee
    
    Chapter 13
    Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10659
    
    Tena Renee Fry
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #19.10 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 11043 Magnolia Ave Ste 202 Riverside CA 92505
    
    MOVANT: DINESH PATEL, AUTHORIZED AGENT OF ECONO LODGE INN & SUITES IN RIVERSIDE CA
    
    EH
    
    Docket 12
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Tena Renee Fry Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Dinesh Patel Represented By
    Benjamin R Heston
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:13-25794
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    Adv#: 6:17-01286 ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation et a v. Gotte Electric, Inc. et
    
    #20.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01286. Complaint by ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation, Another Meridian Company, LLC, Inland Machinery, Inc. against Gotte Electric, Inc., Insurance Company Of The West, Employment Development Department, Trico-Savi Business Park, L.P., a California limited partnership, Angela Denise McKnight, Steven Schonder, Western Alliance Bank, an Arizona corporation, United states of america, Carlin Law Group APC, Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Washington corporation, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). Complaint in Interpleader Nature of Suit: (02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy))) (Bastian, James)
    Trico-Savi Business Park L.P. - DISMISSED 12/28/17
    Western Alliance Bank, dba Torrey Pines Bank - Dismissed 2/1/18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Defendant(s):
    Gotte Electric, Inc. Pro Se Insurance Company Of The West Represented By
    Jennifer Leland
    David B Shemano Howard J Weg
    Employment Development Represented By
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    Elisa B Wolfe-Donato
    
    Chapter 11
    Angela Denise McKnight Pro Se
    Steven Schonder Pro Se
    United states of america Represented By Charles Parker
    Carlin Law Group APC Represented By Kevin R Carlin
    Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Represented By Daniel P Scholz
    DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
    Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:13-25794
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #21.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Inland Machinery, Inc
    
    From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18
    
    Also #22 & #23 EH
    Docket 630
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:13-25794
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #22.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re ASR Constructors Inc
    
    From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18
    
    Also #21 & #23 EH
    Docket 630
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:13-25794
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #23.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Another Meridian Company LLC
    
    From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18
    
    Also #21 & #22 EH
    Docket 630
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:17-11053
    
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #24.00 Motion for Order Dismissing Chapter 13 Case Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 1112(b)
    
    Also #25 EH
    Docket 141
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On February 13, 2017, Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On June 13, 2017, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan. The disclosure statement was amended once but has not been approved. On July 24, 2017, Debtor filed a motion to set property value. After an evidentiary hearing, the Court valued the real property, located at 25211 Sunnymead Blvd., Moreno Valley, CA at $13.5 million, a far higher valuation than Debtor’s proposed $7 million.
    
    On January 30, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss its Chapter 11 case. On February 12, 2018, UST filed a limited opposition, arguing that Debtor should be required to pay its UST quarterly fees and that a six month re-filing bar should be imposed.
    
    DISCUSSION
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(1) states:
    
    Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party I interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.
    
    11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4) provides a non-exclusive list of sixteen examples of cause – most of which are more appropriately considered when the moving party is an entity other than the debtor.
    
    Here, Debtor’s Chapter 11 case has been pending for more than one year and Debtor has been unable to get its disclosure statement approved. Debtor now asserts that effectuation of a Chapter 11 plan is unrealistic and no creditors have filed a Chapter 11 plan or opposed this motion. Therefore, the Court finds there is cause to dismiss or convert the case under § 1112(b). Because Debtor does not have any meaningful unencumbered assets, the Court finds that dismissal is in the best interests of creditors.
    
    UST requires that any dismissal order be conditioned on payment of the UST’s quarterly fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1930(a)(6). For the reasons set forth in In re Rose, 86
    B.R. 439 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988) the Court finds UST’s request to be appropriate.
    
    UST also requests that the Court impose a six-month refiling bar. The Court finds such a bar to be inappropriate here because there are no indications of any bad faith on the part of Debtor. Indeed, Debtor’s inability to successfully confirm a plan in this case was largely driven by the adjudication following an evidentiary hearing on
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    Debtor’s motion to value real property. Furthermore, the Court notes that UST references § 349 in support of its request for a re-filing bar. Section 349 states, in relevant part: "nor does the dismissal of a case under this title prejudice the debtor with regard to the filing of a subsequent petition under this title, except as provided in section 109(g) of this title." Section 109(g), however, is only applicable to individuals or family farmers, and, as such, the legal authority for such a request is, at best, unclear.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and DISMISS the case conditioned on the payment of any outstanding UST fees. Debtor to file a declaration attesting to the fulfillment of this condition prior to lodging the dismissal order.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
    Movant(s):
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
    2:00 PM
    6:17-11053
    
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #25.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 7/25/17, 8/22/17, 10/18/17, 12/4/17, 1/22/18
    
    Also #24 EH
    Docket 6
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Rio Rancho Super Mall LLC Represented By Christopher J Langley Steven P Chang
    2:00 PM
    6:17-17137
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #26.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 1/30/18, 2/13/18
    Also #27 EH
    Docket 82
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/27/18
    1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
      
      On August 25, 2017, Rick’s Patio, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On October 10, 2017, the Court entered an interim order approving use of cash collateral. On October 13, 2017, the Court entered an OSC why the case should not be dismissed and Debtor’s counsel sanctioned for using cash collateral without a court order or the consent of the secured creditor. On October 18, 2017, the Court authorized the employment of Rosenstein and Associates as counsel for Debtor. On November 15, 2017, the Court sanctioned Robert Rosenstein in the amount of $500.
      
      On December 26, 2017, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan.1 Two days later, Debtor filed a motion for an extension of time to have plan of reorganization confirmed. Debtor’s request for an extension was granted on January 30, 2018, but Debtor never uploaded an order on the matter. The Court held a hearing on Debtor’s disclosure statement on February 13, 2018, and continued the matter for two weeks. On February 20, 2018, the Court entered an order approving a stipulation between Debtor and First Home Bank regarding cash collateral. Later that day, Debtor filed an amended disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan.
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Ricks Patio, Inc
      
      Chapter 11
    2. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
      
      Debtor is a California corporation engaged in the business of selling spas and supplies. Debtor operates from a leased location in Corona, California. Debtor moved to its present location in 2014; the Corona location is much larger and more expensive than the previous location in Moreno Valley.
      
      Debtor states that, around the time of its move to Corona, a recession in the economy and a delay in freeway construction combined to slow down sales. The decline in sales combined with increased rent caused Debtor to seek a loan from First Home Bank.
      When sales did not quickly stabilize, however, Debtor opted to take additional loans to cover the loan to First Home Bank and became stuck in a "escalating cycle of debts." [Dkt. No. 109, pg. 3, lines 13-14]. Debtor subsequently filed bankruptcy.
    3. DEADLINES
      
      11 U.S.C. § 1129(e) states:
      
      In a small business case, the court shall confirm a plan that complies with the applicable provisions of this title and that is filed in accordance with section 1121(e) not later than 45 days after the plan is filed unless the time for confirmation is extended in accordance with section 1121(e)(3).
      
      11 U.S.C. § 1121(e)(3) provides three requirements which must be satisfied for the § 1129(e) deadline to be extended. The third provision requires that "the order extending time is signed before the existing deadline has expired." Here, the existing deadline to confirm Debtor’s Chapter 11 plan was February 11, 2018, and Debtor did
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Ricks Patio, Inc
      
      Chapter 11
      not upload an order prior to that deadline. Therefore, Debtor is precluded from seeking an extension of the existing deadline.
      
      Pursuant to § 1112(b)(4)(J), failure to confirm a plan within the time allowed by the applicable deadlines is cause for dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7. See, e.g., In re Roots Rents, Inc., 420 B.R. 28, 37 (Bankr. D. Idaho 2009) (failure to confirm plan or obtain extension warrants dismissal of case). Generally, an amended plan relates back to the filing of an earlier plan, and, as a result, a small business Chapter 11 debtor cannot circumvent the applicable deadlines by simply amending the plan and generating new deadlines. See, e.g., In re Star Ambulance Serv., LLC, 540 B.R. 251, 258-59 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2015) (deadline calculated from original filing; analyzing relation back standard). Therefore, on the request of a party in interest, the Court would be compelled to dismiss or convert Debtor’s case.
    4. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
      
      In addition to the disclosure statement, the following exhibits are included, in addition to a declaration of Debtor’s Vice President, Richard Colosimo: (1) historical sales spreadsheet (Exhibit 1); (2) internet articles (Exhibit 2); (3) cash flow projections
      (Exhibit 3); and (4) the amended Chapter 11 plan.
      
      While the disclosure statement generally adheres to the standard small business disclosure statement form, as noted in section IV, infra, there are certain deficiencies related to the specific facts here.
      
      The Chapter 11 Plan’s proposed effective date is ninety days after the entry of the confirmation order. There are four classes of claims and two categories of unclassified claims:
      1. Class 1: Wells Fargo Commercial Distribution Finance, LLC -- $551,794.95
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Ricks Patio, Inc
        
        Chapter 11
        claim, apparently secured by blanket lien on all of Debtor’s assets. To be paid in full at $5k-$20k/week until the claim has been paid in full (approximately two years). Debtor states that this class is unimpaired.
      2. Class 2: FirsT Home Bank -- $257,858.19 claim, apparently secured by blanket lien on all of Debtor’s assets. To be paid at $3,402/month for approximately seven years. Debtor states that this class is unimpaired.
      3. Class 3: General Unsecured Creditors -- Debtor has divided the general unsecured claims into six subclasses with each subclass holding one claim. Nevertheless, the subclasses have the exact same treatment: payment in full within six years. None of the subclasses identify the amount of the claim or the payment. Debtor also includes a provision that states the general unsecured creditors will receive at least $15k/month.
      4. Class 4: Equity Interests – will not be affected and class is unimpaired,
        
        Type 1: Rosenstein’s fees ($30k) – paid in full on effective date
        Type 2: Accounting fees – estimated at $5,000, paid in full on effective date.
        
        Type 3: Priority tax claims – Debtor is subject to an audit by the California State Board of Equalization but disputes that it has any liability. If liability exists, claim will be paid in approximately equal monthly payments over four years.
    5. LEGAL ANALYSIS
    A. Adequate Information
    
    A Chapter 11 disclosure statement is required to contain "adequate information" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1125(b). Section 1125(f)(2) provides that: "the court may approve a disclosure statement submitted on standard forms approved by the court or
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    adopted under section 2075 of title 28." The United States Courts have devised a disclosure statement template for small businesses, Form B25B, which Debtor generally adopted as to format.
    
    As to the substance of a disclosure statement, 11 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1) defines "adequate information" as:
    
    information of a kind, and in sufficient detail as far as is reasonably practicable in light of the nature and history of the debtor and the condition of the debtor’s books and records, including a discussion of the potential material Federal tax consequences of the plan to the debtor, any successor to the debtor, and a hypothetical investor typical of the holders of claims or interests in the case, that would enable such a hypothetical investor of the relevant class to make an informed judgment about the plan, but adequate information need not include such information about any other possible or proposed plan and in determining whether a disclosure statement provides adequate information, the court shall consider the complexity of the case, the benefit of additional information to creditors and other parties in interest, and the cost of providing additional information
    
    The type of information required varies with the circumstances. See, e.g., In re Jeppson, 66 B.R. 269, 292 (Bankr. D. Utah 1986) (listing nineteen categories of information commonly required); see also In re Malek, 35 B.R. 443, 443-44 (Bankr.
    E.D. Mich. 1983) (listing minimum requirements).
    
    While the amended disclosure statement is improved in the description of the financial status of Debtor and the claims against the estate, the disclosure statement is still incomplete in several respects, including the following:
    
    -First, Debtor’s description of the primary claims and their proposed treatment under the proposed plan is incomplete. Specifically, Debtor indicates that it will pay Class 1
    $5,000-$20,000 per week with no explanation how the exact amount is to be
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    calculated. Next, the description of the claims in Class 3, the general unsecured claims, is even vaguer. The plan provides that each of these claims will be paid in full with interest at the federal judgment over six years. Debtor does not identify, however, the amount of these claims, the monthly payment required, or an applicable interest rate. Debtor does provide claim amounts for the general unsecured claims in its liquidation analysis. It is unclear whether these amounts are reliable, however, given that Debtor lists an amount for "Class 3" (no sub class) when no such claim exists.
    Debtor has added a "payment provision section" which states that general unsecured claims are going to receive at least $15,000/month. It is unclear how this amount would be distributed within the class, however, and if only minimum payments were made every month, the claims would not be paid in full.
    
    -Second, Debtor’s description of the overall financial condition of the business lacks sufficient detail. The "risk factor" section of the disclosure statement is simply not helpful. Debtor has added two exhibits, historical sales and cash flow projections, which provide details regarding Debtor’s business operations. Debtor’s cash flow projection assumes an increase in sales and indicates that Debtor will easily be able to satisfy its plan obligations. Nevertheless, to this point, the projections do not appear to contain an expense for Class 3, and some months do not appear to allow for funds to pay Class 3. Debtor’s historical figures do not include expenses and so the Court (or an investor) is unable to ascertain the reasonableness of the predicted expenses.
    
    -Third, the credibility of Debtor’s projections is at issue. Specifically, Debtor’s projections do not seem to reconcile with the small business operating reports filed with the Court. For instance, Debtor’s cash flow projection indicates income of approximately $168k and expenses of approximately $181k for January 2018. The small business operating report, however, indicates income of approximately $215k and expenses of approximately $217k. Debtor’s historical figures do not include expenses so the Court is unable to engage in a comparison outside of January 2018. Regarding income, however, the Court notes that the figures provided for October to December 2017 are substantially different in the small business operating reports than in the historical sales attached to the disclosure statement. The Court also notes that in those three months, Debtor was operating at an approximately $10,000 loss/month, so it is unclear if the expense figures provided are reasonable, or, if they are, whether the plan is feasible.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
    Robert B Rosenstein
    Movant(s):
    Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
    Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
    2:00 PM
    6:17-17137
    
    Ricks Patio, Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #27.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 9/26/17, 11/14/17, 2/13/18 Also #26
    EH
    
    Docket 8
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Ricks Patio, Inc Represented By
    Robert B Rosenstein
    11:00 AM
    6:15-11774
    
    David K Fishbeck
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 72
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    02/28/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees:
    $4,750
    Trustee Expenses:
    $77.98
    Attorney Fees:
    $15,506.20
    Attorney Costs:
    $78.70
    
    The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    David K Fishbeck Represented By Stephen H Darrow
    Trustee(s):
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    David K Fishbeck
    
    Chapter 7
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Hydee J Riggs
    11:00 AM
    6:17-13483
    
    Ricardo Enciso and Sonia Gamez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 42
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    02/28/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The Trustee Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 1,976.01 Trustee Expenses: $ 226.01
    
    The trustee may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ricardo Enciso Represented By Speros P Maniates
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Sonia Gamez Represented By
    Speros P Maniates
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Ricardo Enciso and Sonia Gamez
    
    Chapter 7
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:14-14377
    
    Hilary D Hill
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #3.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Lien 956 South Calle Tomas, Palm Springs, Ca 92264 with Robert A. Nellessen
    
    From: 11/29/17, 1/24/18 EH
    Docket 45
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    02/28/2018
    
    Creditor Nellessen having filed non-opposition to the Motion, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion avoiding the lien of Nellessen. The Court makes no finding as to value.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    
    11/29/2017
    
    The Court is inclined to allow the parties the opportunity to obtain appraisals or other valuations of the subject property.
    
    Alternatively, Debtor’s evidence of the amount of the lien of Wells Fargo refers to the balance as of the filing of the motion. While Debtor is free to brief the appropriate time for determining the amount of a lien, in the absence of any argument on the issue, the Court concludes that the appropriate date is the petition date.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Hilary D Hill
    
    Chapter 7
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Hilary D Hill Represented By
    Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
    Movant(s):
    Hilary D Hill Represented By
    Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
    Elizabeth A LaRocque
    11:00 AM
    6:16-14390
    
    Jina Soo Choi
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #4.00 Motion for fine and/or disgorgement of fees against bankruptcy petition preparer United States Trustees Notice of Motion and Motion to Fine and Enjoin Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Sandra Cooper; Declaration of Dimple P. Mehra
    
    EH
    
    Docket 83
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    02/28/2018
    On May 16, 2016 ("Petition Date"), Jina Soo Choi ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 13 relief. On August 4, 2016, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. On January 6, 2017, the Debtor moved the Court for an order dismissing her case. The case was dismissed on March 6, 2017.
    
    On March 10, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed its Motion of United States Trustee For An Order Disgorging Fees, Assessing Damages, And Imposing Fines And Against Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Sandra Cooper ("Cooper") Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 110 ("First Motion"). The Motion was amended on March 29, 2017.
    
    On September 6, 2017, the Court granted the First Motion and ordered Cooper to (1) disgorge $2,000, (2) to pay $2,000 in damages to the Debtor, (3) pay $21,000 in fines to the UST. (Docket No. 80)(the "Prior Order"). Additionally, the Prior Order required Cooper to file a declaration attesting to her compliance with the Order within 45 days of its entry. No declaration was ever filed.
    
    On January 23, 2018, the UST filed its Motion to Fine and Enjoin Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Sandra Cooper ("Motion").
    
    DISCUSSION
    The Motion seeks an order enjoining Cooper from engaging in any petition
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Jina Soo Choi
    
    Chapter 7
    preparer services, whether directly or indirectly in any manner and fining Cooper an additional $500 for her failure to comply with the Court’s Prior Order.
    
    Section 110(j)(3) provides that "[t]he court, as part of its contempt power, may enjoin a bankruptcy petition preparer that has failed to comply with a previous order issued under this section. The injunction under this paragraph may be issued on the motion of the court, the trustee, or the United States trustee (or the bankruptcy administrator, if any)." 11 U.S.C. § 110(j)(3).
    
    Here, the UST has provided multiple notices to Cooper her advising her of the Prior Order and of her duties in connection with that order. Notwithstanding such notice, Cooper has failed to file the required declaration, and has failed to respond or file opposition to the instant Motion. Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the UST’s request for an injunction.
    
    Finally, as indicated by the UST, § 110(h)(5) authorizes an additional $500 fine for each failure to comply with a court order to turn over funds. Cooper’s failure to comply with the Prior Order warrants the imposition of the additional $500 fine.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, the tentative ruling is to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jina Soo Choi Represented By
    Nicholas S Nassif
    Movant(s):
    United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani Everett L Green
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Trustee(s):
    
    Jina Soo Choi
    
    Abram Feuerstein esq
    
    Chapter 7
    Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-11834
    
    David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 Chapter 7 Trustee's Motion for Order Disallowing the Following Claim Pursuant to Rule 3001(c)(3) of Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: Claim No. 2 First National Bank of Omaha
    
    EH
    
    Docket 41
    Tentative Ruling:
    02/28/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On March 9, 2017 ("Petition Date"), David and Carol Norwood (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Karl Anderson is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On January 29, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claims # 2 of First National Bank of Omaha ("Claimant").
    
    Service was proper and no opposition or response has been filed.
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood
    
    Chapter 7
    must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    ANALYSIS:
    
    The Trustee objects that the Claim does not meet the requirements of FRBP 3001(c)(3). In support, the Trustee argues that he requested information necessary for Claimant to comply with FRBP 3001 and did not receive an adequate response.
    Specifically, the Trustee requested the information regarding the date of the last transaction, the date of the last payment on the account, and the date on which the account was charged to profit and loss. (Obj. at 8). The Objection does not otherwise contest the amount of the claim or assert any state law defense against the claim.
    
    Trustee Objection fails to distinguish the Ninth Circuit BAP decision in In re Campbell which clarified the holding of In re Heath, that a claim objection that does not actually contest the debtor's liability or the amount of the debt is not enough to
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood
    
    Chapter 7
    disallow a proof of claim, even if the proof of claim lacks the documentation required by Rule 3001(c). In re Campbell, 336 B.R. 430, 434 (9th Cir. BAP 2005)(citing In re Heath, 331 B.R. 424 (9th Cir. BAP 2005)). Campbell explained the following reasons supporting its holding:
    
    that under Section 502 the grounds for objection to claims do not include a lack of compliance with Rule 3001(c); that the procedure for claims allowance or disallowance is designed to be speedy and inexpensive; that Section 502(a) deems claims allowed; that Debtors cannot overcome that presumption by filing objections that do not actually dispute the liability or amount of the claim; and that nothing in this statutory scheme violates due process or equitable principles.
    
    Campbell at 434-435. See also In re Brunson, 486 B.R. 759, 770 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2013) (discussing amendment of FRBP 3001 to provide courts with the ability to sanction creditors for noncompliance with FRBP 3001, without, however providing for disallowance of claims).
    
    The Court notes that parties seeking disallowance for failure of a creditor to comply with Rule 3001 could alternatively object as to the liability where the sworn schedules do not identify the name of the claimant or the amount of the claim.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Here, notwithstanding the infirmities identified in the Objection, under the circumstances of the facts presented here, the Court is inclined to order as follows:
    1. The Objection is SUSTAINED;
    2. The Claimaint shall have 45 days to file an amended claim;
    3. Failure by Claimant to file an amended claim with supporting documentation in compliance with FRBP 3001 shall be deemed as the Claimant’s consent to the disallowance of the Claim.
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood
    
    Chapter 7
    David Leroy Norwood Represented By Jenny L Doling
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Carol Ann Norwood Represented By Jenny L Doling
    Movant(s):
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Leonard M Shulman
    Trustee(s):
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Leonard M Shulman
    11:00 AM
    6:14-17350
    
    Dean L. Springer, Sr. and Tami Jo Springer
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 CONT Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order From: 8/30/17, 9/20/17, 11/1/17, 12/13/17, 2/7/18
    EH
    
    Docket 148
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/28/18 AT 11:00 AM
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Dean L. Springer Sr. Pro Se
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Tami Jo Springer Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Hilder & Associates Represented By
    Lei Lei Wang Ekvall
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Richard A Marshack Sarah Cate Hays
    D Edward Hays Laila Masud
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15816
    
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #7.00 CONT Landlords Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Re: Allow and Authorize Immediate Payment of One El Paseo North, LLCs Gap Rent Claim under Section 502(f) of the Bankruptcy Code
    (Holding Date)
    
    From: 9/27/17, 1/24/18 EH
    Docket 29
    *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/13/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    9/27/17
    BACKGROUND
    
    On July 12, 2017, an involuntary Chapter 7 petition was filed against Integrated Wealth Management, Inc. ("Debtor"). After an extension of the applicable deadline, Debtor filed its answer on September 12, 2017.
    
    Prior to the answer being filed, One El Paseo North, LLC ("Landlord") filed a motion for immediate payment of its gap rent claim pursuant to § 502(f). Landlord asserts that it holds a gap rent claim totaling $27,776.73, covering the time period between the filing of the involuntary petition, on July 12, 2017, and the time Debtor abandoned the premises, on August 18, 2017.
    
    DISCUSSION
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    11 U.S.C. § 502(f) states:
    
    (f) In an involuntary case, a claim arising in the ordinary course of the debtor’s business or financial affairs after the commencement of the case but before the earlier of the appointment of the appointment of a trustee and the order for relief shall be determined as of the date such claim arises, and shall be allowed under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section or disallowed under subsection
    (d) or (e) of this section, the same as if such claim had arisen before the date of the filing of the petition.
    
    While Landlord is correct that the Bankruptcy Code allows payment of ordinary course business claims that accrue during the gap period, it is unclear what the legal justification is for Landlord’s request that the Court order the gap claim to be paid immediately. 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(3) specifically affords debts incurred pursuant to § 502(f) third-priority status. If the estate is administratively insolvent, or does not have funds to pay all first, second, and third-priority claims, then Landlord would not receive full payment of its claim. Because Landlord may not receive full payment of its claim, it would be inappropriate to order immediate payment of its claim.
    
    Debtor further objects to the issuance of an order allowing Landlord’s claim, asserting that a motion to allow a claim for an unpaid § 502(f) claim is procedurally improper. The Court disagrees with Debtor’s contention that a party cannot seek allowance of an administrative claim separate from filing a proof of claim. As an order for relief has not yet been entered, however, the relief requested is premature, since, among other things, a Chapter 7 trustee has not had the opportunity to vet the request. As an aside, the Court notes that Landlord has filed a proof of claim, but it did not request administrative priority.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    The Court will DENY the motion.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
    Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera
    Movant(s):
    One El Paseo North, LLC Represented By Thomas J Polis
    11:00 AM
    6:17-19823
    
    Randall Lee Hoover, Jr. and Amber LaRie Hoover
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.00 CONT Motion for Authority to Redeem Personal Property and Approval of Associated Financial and Attorney Fees
    
    From: 2/7/18 EH
    Docket 16
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    02/28/2018
    Debtors have filed a supplemental declaration in support of the valuation of the Vehicle. The Court, finding the evidence sufficient for purposes of redemption under section 722, is inclined to GRANT the Motion.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    02/07/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    On November 28, 2017, Randall and Amber Hoover (collectively, the "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief. Steven Speier is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the Debtors’ estate is a 2010 Toyota Prius (the "Vehicle").
    
    On December 11, 2017, the Debtors filed their motion to redeem a the Vehicle, which is secured by the lien of Gateway One Lending ("Gateway"). The Debtors assert that the value of the Vehicle is no more than $6,848. The Debtors believe the debt owed on the Vehicle is a dischargeable consumer debt and that the Vehicle has either been exempted or abandoned by the estate.
    
    Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Randall Lee Hoover, Jr. and Amber LaRie Hoover
    
    Chapter 7
    
    DISCUSSION:
    The Debtors seek to redeem the Vehicle pursuant to FRBP 6008 and 11 U.S.C.
    § 722.
    
    Redemption in Chapter 7
    
    An individual Chapter 7 debtor may redeem tangible personal property intended primarily for personal, family or household use from a lien securing a dischargeable consumer debt, if either (1) the property is exempt under § 522 or (2) it has been abandoned under § 554. 11 U.S.C. § 722. Redemption is made by paying the lienholder the amount of its allowed claim secured by the lien. Id.
    
    Though a chapter 7 debtor must take certain action to preserve the automatic stay when seeking to redeem personal property secured by a lien, see 11 U.S.C. §§ 362(h), 521(a)(2), & 521(a)(6), there is no deadline impacting a debtor’s substantive right to redeem (even after a discharge has been entered). In re Rodgers, 273 B.R. 186, 191 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2002); In re Cassar, 139 B.R. 253, 254 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1992). Rather, redemption under § 722 requires that a debtor demonstrate only the following: (1) both the property subject to the lien and the underlying debt must be consumer-related; (2) the debt secured by the lien must be dischargeable in bankruptcy; (3) the property must either be exempted under § 522 or abandoned under
    § 554; and (4) the debtor must pay the lien holder the amount of the allowed secured claim. In re Jewell, 232 B.R. 904, 906 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 1999). If the debtor fails to satisfy any of these requirements the motion shall be denied. Id.
    
    In support of the Motion, the Debtors have provided no evidence to support the Motion. There is no declaration submitted by the Debtors attesting to the value of the Vehicle. Moreover, Schedule C appears to indicate that the Debtors did not exempt the Vehicle under §522 (however, given that the Trustee has issued a Report
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Randall Lee Hoover, Jr. and Amber LaRie Hoover
    
    Chapter 7
    of No Distribution and that no opposition or response has been filed by Gateway, the Court is inclined to find that the Trustee’s No Asset Report is sufficient to indicate abandonment under the circumstances of the instant case).
    
    TENTATIVE RULING:
    For the foregoing reasons, the tentative ruling is to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to February 28, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for Debtors to provide evidence in support of the Motion.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Debtors are directed to file and serve notice of the continuance.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Randall Lee Hoover Jr. Represented By John A Varley Lennie A Alzate
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Amber LaRie Hoover Represented By John A Varley Lennie A Alzate
    Movant(s):
    Randall Lee Hoover Jr. Represented By John A Varley Lennie A Alzate
    Amber LaRie Hoover Represented By John A Varley John A Varley Lennie A Alzate Lennie A Alzate
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Randall Lee Hoover, Jr. and Amber LaRie Hoover
    
    Chapter 7
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:17-10724
    
    Bausman and Company Incorporated
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.10 Amended Motion (related document(s): 157 Motion Motion of National Wood Products, Inc. for Allowance of Administrative Expense Claim Pursuant to 11
    U.S.C. 503(b)(1) filed by Creditor NATIONAL WOOD PRODUCTS, INC.) Amended Motion of National Wood Products, Inc. for Allowance of Administrative Expense Claim Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 503(b)(1) & 11 U.S.C. 503(b)(9) (1) & 11 U.S.C. 503(b)(9) # 2 Proposed Order Amended Order After Hearing Approving National Wood Products, Inc.'s Amended Motion for Order Allowing an Administrative Expense Claim)
    
    EH
    
    Docket 162
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    02/28/2017
    
    Based on the Trustee's nonopposition and finding good cause for allowance of Movant's claim, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion allowing Movant's claim as an administrative expense claim under section 503(b)(1)(A).
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
    William A Smelko
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Best Best & Krieger Caroline Djang
    2:00 PM
    6:13-16964
    
    Narinder Sangha
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha
    
    #9.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:13-ap-01171. Complaint by Charles Edward Schrader against Narinder Sangha . willful and malicious injury HOLDING DATE
    
    From: 7/8/15, 11/4/15, 3/2/16, 12/14/16, 12/13/17, 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 7/12/17, 8/2/17, 9/27/17, 10/4/17, 11/1/17, 12/6/17, 12/20/17
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    02/28/2018
    
    This hearing is vacated. The Status Conference is CONTINUED to March 21, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. The Court has provided notice to the parties of the continuance.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
    Defendant(s):
    Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
    Plaintiff(s):
    Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Narinder Sangha
    
    Chapter 7
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:13-27611
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD
    
    #10.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation, Jerry Wang against Douglas J Roger MD. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 68 Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury, 67 Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 41 Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e) (Holding date)
    
    From: 11/26/14, 1/26/15, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 1/27/16, 6/29/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16, 2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 7/31/17, 10/4/17,
    1/3/18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M. - ANOTHER SUMMONS ISSUED
    Tentative Ruling:
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
    Defendant(s):
    Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
    Plaintiff(s):
    Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
    Jerry Wang Represented By
    Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    A. Cisneros Represented By
    Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays
    Trustee(s):
    Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
    Franklin R Fraley Jr
    2:00 PM
    6:17-15809
    
    Beatrice A Diaz
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01287 Cisneros v. Diaz
    
    #11.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01287. Complaint by Arturo
    M. Cisneros against Jose L Diaz. (Charge To Estate). - Complaint: (1) for Declaratory Relief; (2) Turnover of Property; and (3) Sale of Interest of Co- Owner in Property of the Estate [11 U.S.C. §§ 363 542] - Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)),(31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))) (Friedman, Anthony)
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Beatrice A Diaz Pro Se
    Defendant(s):
    Jose L Diaz Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    Arturo M. Cisneros Represented By Anthony A Friedman
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
    Anthony A Friedman
    2:00 PM
    6:17-13649
    
    Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.
    
    #12.00 Motion to vacate order Defendant Fernando Fabrigas, Jr.'s Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment
    
    EH
    
    Docket 29
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 3/21/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
    R Creig Greaves
    Defendant(s):
    Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
    R Creig Greaves
    Movant(s):
    Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
    Plaintiff(s):
    Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
    
    Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander
    
    Chapter 7
    2:00 PM
    6:16-18182
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #13.00 CONT Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11 by Claimant Natasha Reynoso and Mark Reynoso
    HOLDING DATE
    
    From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17
    
    EH
    
    Docket 44
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Movant(s):
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    2:00 PM
    6:16-18182
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
    
    #14.00 CONT OSC why case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute From: 2/22/18
    Also #15 & #16 EH
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Defendant(s):
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
    Jose Pastora Represented By
    Andrew L Leff
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Edward T Weber
    
    Chapter 13
    Plaintiff(s):
    Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:16-18182
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
    
    #15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [26] Crossclaim by Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman against all defendants
    
    From: 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17
    
    Also #14 & #16 EH
    Docket 26
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Defendant(s):
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
    Jose Pastora Represented By
    Andrew L Leff
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    
    Chapter 13
    Plaintiff(s):
    Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:16-18182
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
    
    #16.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [13] Amended Complaint by Michael J Hemming on behalf of Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:16-ap-01277. Complaint by Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Douglas Edward Goodman, Anne Louise Goodman. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) filed by Plaintiff Mark & Natasha Reynoso)
    (Holding Date)
    
    From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17
    
    Also #14 & #15 EH
    Docket 13
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Defendant(s):
    Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
    Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Edward Goodman
    
    Chapter 13
    Jose Pastora Represented By
    Andrew L Leff
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
    Plaintiff(s):
    Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:14-15845
    
    Alex Soto
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #1.00 Motion to Reconsider Dismissal of Case EH
    Docket 83
    Tentative Ruling: 3/1/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On May 5, 2014, Alex Soto ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 7, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
    
    On October 25, 2017, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for delinquency. On November 17, 2017, Debtor filed her opposition and a request for hearing. On December 14, 2017, after a hearing, the case was dismissed.
    
    On January 23, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to vacate dismissal stating she now has enough funds to cure the delinquency.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    Debtor relies on Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(1), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 9024, which allows for relief from an order based on "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." Here, Debtor appears
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Alex Soto
    
    Chapter 13
    to assert that he attempted to cure the plan delinquency, as well as file a motion to the modify the plan, but miscommunication between Debtor and his attorney, combined with a delay in the posting of the plan payment, resulted in the case being dismissed. Because Debtor has provided an explanation which arguably fits within the standard of excusable neglect and because Debtor was more than three years into his plan, the Court is inclined to grant the motion conditioned on compliance with the conditions in Trustee’s comments,
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion conditioned on compliance with the Trustee’s comments.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Alex Soto Represented By
    Natalie A Alvarado
    Movant(s):
    Alex Soto Represented By
    Natalie A Alvarado Natalie A Alvarado
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-13851
    
    Richard J Sarenana, Jr and Maria Sarenana
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #2.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
    Docket 37
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Richard J Sarenana Jr Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Maria Sarenana Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Movant(s):
    Richard J Sarenana Jr Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Maria Sarenana Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-16037
    
    Nadia M. Lipscomb
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #3.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
    Docket 33
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Nadia M. Lipscomb Represented By
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Movant(s):
    Nadia M. Lipscomb Represented By
    James D. Hornbuckle
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20229
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #4.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien with Morgan Hill Homeowners Association Also #5 - #8
    EH
    
    Docket 49
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/1/18
    
    Sean Coy ("Debtor") filed three motions to avoid liens held by Morgan Hill Homeowners Association ("HOA"). HOA filed opposition to all three motions, and Debtor filed a reply to each opposition.
    
    One motion [Dkt. No. 49] sought the avoidance of an abstract of judgment (recorder’s number 2009-0553451) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Abstract is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the abstract of judgment.
    Therefore, because the abstract of judgment impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    A second motion [Dkt. No. 50] seeks the avoidance of a notice of levy (recorder’s number 2017-0290203) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Notice of Levy is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the notice of levy. Therefore, because the notice of levy impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    Finally, a third motion [amended as Dkt. No. 56] is less than clear. The motion identifies the subject lien as possessing recording number 2017-0290203, which is the
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    recording number of the notice of levy identified above. HOA implicitly adopts the same position as was stated in the paragraph above. Additionally this motion having been brought pursuant to § 506(d) (instead of § 522(f)), the HOA argued that because its "secured" claim had not been disallowed, lien avoidance under § 506(d) was not permissible. The Court need not address this argument because this motion is redundant given the motion that is docket number 50. While Debtor’s reply indicates that its intent was to avoid a different lien, the assessment lien, through the motion that is docket number 56, the motion identified the notice of levy as the lien to be avoided. Therefore, the Court is inclined to deny this motion as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Movant(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20229
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #5.00 Motion to Avoid Lien re Notice of Levy with Morgan Hill Homeowners Association
    
    Also #4 - #8 EH
    Docket 50
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/1/18
    
    Sean Coy ("Debtor") filed three motions to avoid liens held by Morgan Hill Homeowners Association ("HOA"). HOA filed opposition to all three motions, and Debtor filed a reply to each opposition.
    
    One motion [Dkt. No. 49] sought the avoidance of an abstract of judgment (recorder’s number 2009-0553451) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Abstract is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the abstract of judgment.
    Therefore, because the abstract of judgment impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    A second motion [Dkt. No. 50] seeks the avoidance of a notice of levy (recorder’s number 2017-0290203) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Notice of Levy is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the notice of levy. Therefore, because the notice of levy impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    Finally, a third motion [amended as Dkt. No. 56] is less than clear. The motion
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    identifies the subject lien as possessing recording number 2017-0290203, which is the recording number of the notice of levy identified above. HOA implicitly adopts the same position as was stated in the paragraph above. Additionally this motion having been brought pursuant to § 506(d) (instead of § 522(f)), the HOA argued that because its "secured" claim had not been disallowed, lien avoidance under § 506(d) was not permissible. The Court need not address this argument because this motion is redundant given the motion that is docket number 50. While Debtor’s reply indicates that its intent was to avoid a different lien, the assessment lien, through the motion that is docket number 56, the motion identified the notice of levy as the lien to be avoided. Therefore, the Court is inclined to deny this motion as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Movant(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20229
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #6.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Certificate Trustee on Behalf of Bosco Credit II Trust Series 2010-1
    
    Also #4 - #8 EH
    Docket 46
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/1/18
    
    On February 28, 2005, Debtor executed two notes and deeds of trust. One had an original amount of $500,000, and the current beneficiary is FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1. The other had an original amount of $106,280, and the current beneficiary is Deutsche Bank National Trust Company ("Deutsche"). The security interest related to the latter is the subject of the lien avoidance motion here.
    
    Deutsche asserts that Debtor and the first lienholder entered into a modification on June 1, 2013, and that such modification prejudiced the rights of Deutsche. Deutsche contends that the modification was without its permission, and that the senior lienholder relinquished its priority with respect to the modified terms. If Deutsche is correct, then Deutsche would not be wholly unsecured and Debtor’s motion would be unsuccessful.
    
    Subject to discussion from the parties, the Court is inclined to GRANT Deutsche’s request for a continuance to allow Deutsche to file an adversary proceeding regarding the extent or priority of a lien.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    Movant(s):
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20229
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #7.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Morgan Hill Homeowners Association Also #4 - #8
    EH
    
    Docket 47
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/1/18
    
    Sean Coy ("Debtor") filed three motions to avoid liens held by Morgan Hill Homeowners Association ("HOA"). HOA filed opposition to all three motions, and Debtor filed a reply to each opposition.
    
    One motion [Dkt. No. 49] sought the avoidance of an abstract of judgment (recorder’s number 2009-0553451) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Abstract is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the abstract of judgment.
    Therefore, because the abstract of judgment impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    A second motion [Dkt. No. 50] seeks the avoidance of a notice of levy (recorder’s number 2017-0290203) pursuant to § 522(f). HOA states in its opposition that "[t]o the extent that the Notice of Levy is the only lien which Debtor seeks to avoid, the Association does not object, but such avoidance would have no effect." In Debtor’s reply, Debtor clarified that the motion sought to avoid the notice of levy. Therefore, because the notice of levy impairs an exemption of the Debtor, and HOA implicitly having consented to the relief requested, the Court is inclined to grant this motion.
    
    Finally, a third motion [amended as Dkt. No. 56] is less than clear. The motion identifies the subject lien as possessing recording number 2017-0290203, which is the
    12:30 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    recording number of the notice of levy identified above. HOA implicitly adopts the same position as was stated in the paragraph above. Additionally this motion having been brought pursuant to § 506(d) (instead of § 522(f)), the HOA argued that because its "secured" claim had not been disallowed, lien avoidance under § 506(d) was not permissible. The Court need not address this argument because this motion is redundant given the motion that is docket number 50. While Debtor’s reply indicates that its intent was to avoid a different lien, the assessment lien, through the motion that is docket number 56, the motion identified the notice of levy as the lien to be avoided. Therefore, the Court is inclined to deny this motion as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Movant(s):
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20229
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 2/15/18
    Also #4 - #7 EH
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-18792
    
    Roman Negrete Manrriquez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/30/17, 12/21/17, 1/25/18
    EH
    
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20019
    
    Frank Prouty
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 2/8/18
    EH
    
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Frank Prouty Represented By
    Nima S Vokshori
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20515
    
    Rasmey John Lim
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/16/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Rasmey John Lim Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20516
    
    Delfino Mendez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/16/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Delfino Mendez Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20519
    
    Carlos Gutierrez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Carlos Gutierrez Represented By Scott Kosner
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20535
    
    Antonio Ochoa
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/9/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Antonio Ochoa Represented By Qais Zafari
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20560
    
    Juana Santiago
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/16/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Juana Santiago Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20610
    
    Tatiana Noemi Alegre
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/16/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Tatiana Noemi Alegre Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:17-20630
    
    Jennifer Heredia
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Jennifer Heredia Represented By Neil R Hedtke
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:15-14501
    
    Vonetta M Mays
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #17.10 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
    
    From: 2/22/18 Also #17.2 EH
    Docket 169
    *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 2/27/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
    Movant(s):
    Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:30 PM
    6:15-14501
    
    Vonetta M Mays
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #17.20 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/22/18
    Also #17.1 EH
    Docket 168
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:13-30641
    
    Jacob J Cannon and Danielle M Cannon
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 113
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Jacob J Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Danielle M Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:14-21279
    
    Reinaldo Rodriguez and Michelle Rodriguez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #19.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
    Docket 54
    *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAW OF MOTION FILED 2/21/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Reinaldo Rodriguez Represented By Julie J Villalobos
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Michelle Rodriguez Represented By Julie J Villalobos
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:14-22362
    
    James Lange and Michelle Lange
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #20.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 133
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    James Lange Represented By
    Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Michelle Lange Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:14-23388
    
    Jose N Recinos and Patricia Recinos
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #21.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 264
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Jose N Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Patricia Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:15-10488
    
    Jose L Rangel and Rosa M Rangel
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #22.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
    Docket 127
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Jose L Rangel Represented By
    Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Rosa M Rangel Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:15-19148
    
    Esmeralda Caldera
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 67
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Esmeralda Caldera Represented By Dana Travis
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:16-16909
    
    Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
    Docket 145
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:16-18248
    
    Juan Jose Franco
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #25.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/8/18
    EH
    
    Docket 76
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Juan Jose Franco Represented By Paul Y Lee
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:17-13063
    
    Ethel N Odimegwu
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #26.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/1/18
    EH
    
    Docket 53
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:17-13719
    
    Sam Venero
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 45
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Sam Venero Represented By
    Edward T Weber
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:17-13804
    
    John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #28.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
    Docket 41
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    John P Morris Represented By
    Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Cassandra M Morris Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:17-16439
    
    Oscar Avila
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #29.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 2/1/18
    EH
    
    Docket 31
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Oscar Avila Represented By
    Sanaz S Bereliani
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    12:31 PM
    6:15-15522
    
    Scott Allan Oswald and Lisa Frances Oswald
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #30.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 1/25/18, 2/22/18
    EH
    
    Docket 78
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Scott Allan Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Lisa Frances Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      9:30 AM
      6:17-14501
      
      Julie Lynn Salazar
      
      Chapter 13
      Adv#: 6:17-01213 Winegardner Masonry, Inc. v. Salazar
      
      #1.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01213. Complaint by Winegardner Masonry, Inc. against Julie Lynn Salazar. fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other)) (Smelko, William)
      Holding Date From: 12/21/18 EH
      Docket 1
      Debtor(s):
      *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/17/18 AT 9:30 A.M.
      Party Information
      Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
      Defendant(s):
      Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By
      Joseph C Markowitz
      Plaintiff(s):
      Winegardner Masonry, Inc. Represented By William A Smelko
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      9:30 AM
      6:17-14501
      
      Julie Lynn Salazar
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #2.00 Evidentiary Hearing re Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 6 by Claimant Winegardner Masonry
      
      From: 12/14/17, 12/21/17 EH
      
      Docket 46
      Debtor(s):
      *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/17/18 AT 9:30 A.M.
      Party Information
      Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
      Movant(s):
      Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
      Julie Lynn Salazar Pro Se
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      1:00 PM
      6:08-14592
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Chapter 7
      Adv#: 6:09-01235 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et
      
      #3.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
      HOLDING DATE
      
      From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
      1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
      12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
      10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
      11/27/17
      
      EH
      
      Docket 1
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
      ------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
      Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      Defendant(s):
      Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
      David Loughnot Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      DOES 1 through 100, inclusive Pro Se
      1:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Chapter 7
      Plaintiff(s):
      RICHARD K. DIAMOND Represented By Richard S Berger Michael I Gottfried
      Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
      John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
      Trustee(s):
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried Richard S Berger Rodger M Landau Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten
      Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
      Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
      Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond
      1:00 PM
      6:08-14592
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Chapter 7
      Adv#: 6:10-01319 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et
      
      #4.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
      HOLDING DATE
      
      From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
      01/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
      12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
      10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
      11/27/17
      
      EH
      
      Docket 1
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
      ------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
      Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      Defendant(s):
      Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
      James P Previti Represented By
      1:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
      
      Chapter 7
      Larry Day Represented By
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
      Neil M Miller Represented By
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
      Paul Roman Represented By
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
      O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
      Peter T. Healy Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
      Plaintiff(s):
      RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By Richard S Berger Peter M Bransten Michael I Gottfried
      Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
      Trustee(s):
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By
      1:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Michael I Gottfried Richard S Berger Rodger M Landau Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
      Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
      Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond
      
      Chapter 7
      1:00 PM
      6:08-14592
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Chapter 7
      Adv#: 6:10-01329 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et
      
      #5.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
      (Defendant - Empire Partners, Inc) HOLDING DATE
      
      From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
      1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
      12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
      10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
      11/27/17
      
      EH
      
      Docket 1
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
      ------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
      Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      Defendant(s):
      Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
      Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb
      1:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      
      Chapter 7
      Previti Realty Fund, L.P. Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      The James Previti Family Trust Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
      Plaintiff(s):
      RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By Richard S Berger Michael I Gottfried
      Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
      John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
      Trustee(s):
      Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried Richard S Berger Rodger M Landau Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten
      Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
      Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
      Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams
      1:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Empire Land, LLC
      
      Thomas J Eastmond
      
      Chapter 7
      10:00 AM
      6:18-11212
      
      Diana J Everett
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #1.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY
      
      MOVANT: DIANA J. EVERETT
      
      EH
      
      Docket 8
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      
      The Debtor indicates that the case was dismissed for two reasons: (1) the Debtor’s disability income decreased, and (2) the Debtor’s daughter was in a serious accident in November 2017 and the Debtor has been paying her medical and legal fees associated with the accident.
      
      The Debtor’s explanation for the dismissal of the prior case is sufficiently detailed. However, the Motion does not address whether there has been a change in the financial or personal affairs of the Debtor since January 2018 (when the case was dismissed) such that the Debtor is likely to be able to complete her plan going forward. In particular, there is no indication that the medical emergency which resulted in dismissal of the Debtor’s prior case has ended. Additionally, the Debtor now indicates that she is supporting her unemployed domestic partner. The Debtor’s disposable income has decreased from $4,197.72 in her prior case to $704.72 in the current case.
      
      Separately, the Court notes that the Notice of Motion did not specify the identities of the Debtor’s secured creditors as required by the Court’s form motion. As such, notice for the secured creditors is improper.
      
      For these reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Diana J Everett
      
      Party Information
      
      Chapter 13
      Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
      Movant(s):
      Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-11096
      
      Mercedes Estrada Ayala
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 200 S. Linden Ave., #12-P, Rialto, CA 92376
      
      MOVANT: HARVEST GLEN LP
      
      EH
      
      Docket 10
      Tentative Ruling:
      
      03/06/2018
      
      Service is Proper Opposition: None
      GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 7(b), 9(b) and 11 of the prayer for relief.
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Mercedes Estrada Ayala Pro Se
      Movant(s):
      Harvest Glen LP Represented By Scott Andrews
      Trustee(s):
      Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-11080
      
      Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #3.00 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY (Real Property: located at 970 Winston Circle, Corona CA 92881)
      
      MOVANT: EDGARDO ARANDA AND KELLEY ARANDA
      
      From: 2/27/18 EH
      Docket 13
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      2/27/2018
      
      The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. The Court finds that Debtors have not provided clear and convincing evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption arising under § 362(c)(3)(C) that this case was not filed in good faith. Specifically, the motion does not address the reasons the previous case was dismissed. Instead the motion and Debtor’s declaration repeatedly recite that the Debtors are willing and able to make their plan payment without any specificity or detail being provided.
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Paul Lee to personally appear.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Movant(s):
      
      Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
      
      Chapter 13
      Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee
      Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-11078
      
      Danny Howard Weeks
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #4.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate
      
      MOVANT: DANNY HOWARD WEEKS
      
      EH
      
      Docket 6
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      
      The declaration in support of the Motion establishes clear and convincing evidence that the instant case was filed in good faith for purposes of continuance of the stay under § 362(c). Based on the evidence that the Debtor’s prior case was adversely impacted by issues with his vehicle and on his assertion that he is now relying on company-provided vehicles, the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the Motion and continue the automatic stay as to all creditors (with the exception of Mission Financial Services which obtained relief from stay in the prior case).
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth
      Movant(s):
      Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-10659
      
      Tena Renee Fry
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #5.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 11043 Magnolia Ave Ste 202 Riverside CA 92505
      
      MOVANT: DINESH PATEL, AUTHORIZED AGENT OF ECONO LODGE INN & SUITES IN RIVERSIDE CA
      
      From: 2/27/18 EH
      Docket 12
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Tena Renee Fry Pro Se
      Movant(s):
      Dinesh Patel Represented By
      Benjamin R Heston
      Trustee(s):
      Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-10546
      
      Rick Allen Skans
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Pacific Coach BlazeN 21FS
      
      MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION
      
      EH
      
      Docket 7
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service is Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Rick Allen Skans Represented By Neil R Hedtke
      Movant(s):
      LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
      Trustee(s):
      Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:18-10468
      
      Dionna C Bell
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15665 Lasselle St #81, Moreno Valley, CA 92551 with Exhibits
      
      MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA NA
      
      EH
      
      Docket 8
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/18
      Service: Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Dionna C Bell Represented By Charles W Daff
      Movant(s):
      Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Megan E Lees
      Trustee(s):
      Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-20622
      
      Marc A Mercurio
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5885 Colorado Ave NW, Unit 401 WASHINGTON, District of Columbia 20011 UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 362.
      
      MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
      
      EH
      
      Docket 10
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service: Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶¶ 3 and 12.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Marc A Mercurio Represented By Aaron Lloyd
      Movant(s):
      Nationstar Mortgage LLC Represented By John D Schlotter
      Trustee(s):
      Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-18300
      
      Deborah Stevenson
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11771 GENIL COURT Mira Loma, Ca, 91752 UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 362. (Schlotter, John)
      
      MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC
      
      EH
      
      Docket 31
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service: Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay and authority to offer loan workout options.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Deborah Stevenson Represented By Edward T Weber
      Movant(s):
      Nationstar Mortgage, LLC dba Mr. Represented By
      John D Schlotter
      Trustee(s):
      Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-17523
      
      Rowena I Argonza and Emerald D Argonza
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 4585 Grand Avenue, Montclair, California 91763
      
      MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
      
      EH
      
      Docket 31
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service: Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT authority to offer loan workout options.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Rowena I Argonza Represented By Julie J Villalobos
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Emerald D Argonza Represented By Julie J Villalobos
      Movant(s):
      U.S. Bank National Association, not Represented By
      Armin M Kolenovic
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Trustee(s):
      
      Rowena I Argonza and Emerald D Argonza
      
      Chapter 7
      Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-17316
      
      Luis Fernando Montoya, Jr.
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ducati 959 Panigale
      
      MOVANT: VW CREDIT INC
      
      EH
      
      Docket 52
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service is Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENIED as to § 362(d)(2) for lack of evidence regarding necessity for reorganization.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Luis Fernando Montoya Jr. Represented By Anthony B Vigil
      Movant(s):
      VW Credit, Inc., dba Ducati Represented By Austin P Nagel
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-13804
      
      John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #12.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Mazda 5
      
      MOVANT: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA
      
      From: 1/9/18, 2/13/18 EH
      Docket 36
      *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/1/18
      Tentative Ruling:
      1/9/2018
      
      Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
      Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      John P Morris Represented By
      Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Cassandra M Morris Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
      Movant(s):
      JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Represented By
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Trustee(s):
      
      John P Morris and Cassandra M Morris
      Jamie D Hanawalt
      
      Chapter 13
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-13608
      
      Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #13.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8893 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
      
      MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
      
      From: 2/13/18 EH
      
      Docket 23
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      02/13/2018
      Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
      
      Subject to discussions re adequate protection, the Court’s tentative is to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay, GRANT authority to offer loan workout options pursuant to ¶3 of prayer for relief and GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Warren Alan Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Kelly Suzanne Hall Represented By
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Movant(s):
      
      Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
      Lionel E Giron
      
      Chapter 13
      U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
      Armin M Kolenovic
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-12307
      
      Darla Bell
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3575 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, NV 89109
      
      MOVANT: HILTON RESORTS CORPORATION
      
      EH
      
      Docket 22
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      03/06/2018
      Service: Proper Opposition: None
      
      GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Darla Bell Represented By
      Andrew Nguyen
      Movant(s):
      Hilton Resorts Corporation Represented By Thomas R Mulally
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-11658
      
      Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #15.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420
      
      MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
      
      From: 2/6/18 EH
      Docket 31
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      2/6/2018
      
      Service is Proper Opposition: None
      
      The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
      § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it is unclear if effective service was made upon "borrower" Anthony Elie. Furthermore, because Anthony Elie is not a party to the note he is not a co-debtor within the meaning of the statute.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
      Movant(s):
      U.S. Bank National Association Represented By
      Armin M Kolenovic
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Trustee(s):
      
      Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
      
      Chapter 13
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:16-14108
      
      Charles M. Wallace, Jr. and Raquel A. Wallace
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #16.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 20006 Waco Road, Apple Valley, California 92308
      
      MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
      
      From: 2/6/18 EH
      Docket 29
      *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
      3/5/18
      Tentative Ruling:
      2/6/2018
      
      Service is Proper Opposition: None
      
      The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
      § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
      
      APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Charles M. Wallace Jr. Represented By Robert W Ripley
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Raquel A. Wallace Represented By Robert W Ripley
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Movant(s):
      
      Charles M. Wallace, Jr. and Raquel A. Wallace
      
      Chapter 13
      Wells Fargo Bank, N.A./Wells Fargo Represented By
      Norman Harrison Armin M Kolenovic John Chandler
      Trustee(s):
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:15-12404
      
      Anthony E Turkson
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #17.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12016 Quantico Dr, Riverside, CA 92505
      
      MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
      
      From: 1/9/18, 2/6/18 EH
      Docket 89
      *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/5/18
      Tentative Ruling:
      1/9/2018
      
      Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
      Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
      Movant(s):
      Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By April Harriott Keith Labell Sean C Ferry
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Trustee(s):
      
      Anthony E Turkson
      
      Chapter 13
      Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:12-27192
      
      Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
      
      Chapter 13
      
      #18.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28114 Championship Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92555
      
      MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
      
      From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18 EH
      Docket 100
      *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/10/18 AT 10:00 AM
      Tentative Ruling:
      11/28/2017
      Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
      
      Debtors have provided evidence that regular payments were made between May 2016 and November 1, 2017 (with the exception of the August 2016 and December 2016 payments for which Debtors are seeking evidence). Exhibit 5, which is the Movant’s summary of post-petition payments reflects numerous debits for 2016 payments which appears to corroborate Debtors’ assertion that refunds were made due to a mix-up in payments being made by the Trustee’s office.
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Achilles A. LaSalle Jr. Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Elsie LaSalle Represented By
      Lazaro E Fernandez
      10:00 AM
      CONT...
      Movant(s):
      
      Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
      
      Chapter 13
      HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
      Armin M Kolenovic Debbie Hernandez Rosemary Allen
      Trustee(s):
      Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
      Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
      2:00 PM
      6:18-10939
      
      Vance Zachary Johnson
      
      Chapter 11
      
      #19.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
  2. Requiring Status Report EH
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10381
  
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #20.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15400 HWY 173, Hesperia CA 92345
  
  MOVANT: VANHOOPS HOLDINGS LP
  
  Also #21 & #22 EH
  Docket 19
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/06/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On January 18, 2018, Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Valley, CA Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The Debtor’s prior case was dismissed on January 9, 2018.
  
  On February 2, 2018, Vanhoops Holdings, LP ("Vanhoops") filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay ("Motion") seeking authority to lift the stay as to certain property located at 15400 Highway 173 in Hesperia, CA (the "Property"). The Property is asserted to be commercial land and the Debtor asserts that the land is occupied by a small number of tenants, including the Debtor’s principal. The Debtor filed its response to the Motion on February 20, 2018.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Vanhoops seeks an order lifting the stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 362(d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(4) alleging:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
  1. A lack of adequate protection;
  2. Bad faith filing;
  3. By its terms, the note is due and payable in its entirety.
    
    Chapter 11
    
    In support of the Motion, Vanhoops asserts that the loan matured on January 18, 2018, and that it holds a total claim of $3,201,486.50. The Motion further indicates based on an attached declaration of the Debtor’s principal, David Vargas, that the Debtor transferred the Property to Mr. Vargas’s wife, Danielle Maria Madrigal, without notice to Vanhoops and without its consent.
    
    In response, the Debtor asserts that the Motion is premature as it was filed early in the case and that Vanhoops has not provided evidence of the fair market value of the Property, and that the current case has been filed in good faith.
    
    Here, Vanhoops’ Motion lacks evidence regarding whether the Debtor was making payments in accordance with the terms of the Note. Additionally, there is no evidence to support the lack of equity in the Property. However, despite the deficiencies in the Motion generally, the Court finds that the evidence that the Debtor conveyed the Property to Danielle Madrigal in direct contravention of the terms of the Note and without authorization from Vanhoops, coupled with the evidence that the Debtor filed its current and prior bankruptcies to forestall foreclosure by Vanhoops, as evidence that the instant bankruptcy filing has been made in bad faith and that the Debtor’s case is really a two party dispute between the Debtor and Vanhoops.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion under §362(d)(1) and (d)(4) as a bad faith filing. The Court is further inclined to GRANT the order under ¶¶ 10(b) and 12 of the prayer for relief. The requests under ¶¶ 4 and 11 are DENIED for lack of cause shown, and the request under ¶ 13 is DENIED as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers Represented By
    Odeha L Warren
    Movant(s):
    Vanhoops Holdings LP Represented By Diana J Carloni
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10381
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #21.00 Order on the Courts own Motion Hearing re Application to Employ Odeha Warren as Attorney
    
    Also #20 & #22
    
    EH
    
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    03/06/2018
    
    BACKGROUND
    
    On January 18, 2018, Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Valley, CA Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The Debtor’s prior case was dismissed on January 9, 2018.
    
    On February 19, 2018, the Debtor filed its Application to Employ Odeha Warren as Counsel to Debtor ("Application"). On February 21, 2018, the Court set the Application for hearing. No oppositions have been filed. On March 5, 2018, the Office of the United States Trustee filed its Objection to the Application.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    The UST correctly points out that the Application was not served in accordance with LBR 2014-1 (there was no proof of service at all). Additionally,
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    when setting the hearing, the Court ordered that the Debtor give notice of the hearing. The Debtor did not comply with the Court’s order. Finally, the UST has correctly pointed out that the Application does not include a Notice indicating to interested parties their deadline for opposition or response.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    Based on the foregoing, the Court need not reach the merits of the Application. The failure to comply with the most basic LBR 2014 requirements, including Applicant’s responsibility to indicate her qualifications, warrants denial of the Application.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers Represented By
    Odeha L Warren
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10381
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #22.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
    1. Requiring Status Report Also #20 & #21
      EH
      
      Docket 0
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers Represented By
      Odeha L Warren
      2:00 PM
      6:17-19936
      
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC
      
      Chapter 11
      
      #23.00 Emergency motion to Approve the Stipulation Regarding DIP Financing and Modification of Cash Collateral Stipulation Between Auto Strap Transport, LLC and Nations Fund I, LLC
      
      Also #23.1 EH
      Docket 170
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
      Movant(s):
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
      2:00 PM
      6:17-19936
      
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC
      
      Chapter 11
      
      #23.10 Joint Motion for Entry of An Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 105(a) and 363 Authorizing The Debtor to (A) Retain Scramble Systems, LLC to Provide the Debtor with a Chief Restructuring Officer and (B) Appoint the Chief Restructuring Officer
      
      Also #23 EH
      Docket 171
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
      Movant(s):
      Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
      2:00 PM
      6:17-15816
      
      Integrated Wealth Management Inc
      
      Chapter 11
      
      #24.00 Motion of Debtor and Debtor-in-Possession For Entry of an Order Authorizing the Debtor to: (1) Engage J. Michael Issa as Chief Restructuring Officer of the Debtor; and (2) Employ GlassRatner Advisory Capital Group, LLC to Assist the Chief Restructuring Officer
      
      Also #25 EH
      Docket 135
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
      Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
      Movant(s):
      Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
      Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
      2:00 PM
      6:17-15816
      
      Integrated Wealth Management Inc
      
      Chapter 11
      
      #25.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
      
      From: 2/6/18, 2/13/18 Also #24
      EH
      
      Docket 102
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
      Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
      10:00 AM
      6:17-10522
      
      Joanne Saycon
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #1.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Americredit Financial Services, Inc. Dba GM Financial re 2013 Toyota Prius
      
      EH
      
      Docket 51
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Joanne Saycon Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
      Trustee(s):
      Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-19035
      
      Stacy Aleen Eble
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #2.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Darden Credit Union re 2014 Dodge Charger
      
      Also #3 EH
      Docket 11
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Stacy Aleen Eble Represented By Daniel King
      Trustee(s):
      Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-19035
      
      Stacy Aleen Eble
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #3.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Darden Credit Union re 2009 GMC Sierra
      
      Also #2 EH
      Docket 13
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Stacy Aleen Eble Represented By Daniel King
      Trustee(s):
      Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-19552
      
      Maria Angeles Lozano
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #4.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and SchoolsFirst FCU re Overdraft Protection Loan
      
      EH
      
      Docket 10
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Maria Angeles Lozano Represented By Daniel King
      Trustee(s):
      Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
      10:00 AM
      6:17-19909
      
      Michelle Rene Katz and Michael Alan Katz
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #5.00 Motion for Approval of Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor(s) and with Navy Federal Credit Union Re: 2015 Jeep Cherokee
      
      EH
      
      Docket 13
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      - NONE LISTED -
      
      Debtor(s):
      
      Party Information
      Michelle Rene Katz Pro Se
      Joint Debtor(s):
      Michael Alan Katz Pro Se
      Movant(s):
      Navy Federal Credit Union #5905 Pro Se
      Trustee(s):
      Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
      11:00 AM
      6:17-18754
      
      Young Sil Han Wang
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #6.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien with Canterbury at Indian Hills HOA EH
      Docket 13
      Tentative Ruling:
      3/7/2018
      
      On October 20, 2017, Young Wang ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 29, 2018, Debtor received a discharge.
      
      On February 8, 2017, Debtor filed a motion to avoid the judicial lien of Canterbury at Indian Hills HOA ("HOA"). On February 22, 2017, HOA filed its opposition, and, on February 27, 2018, Debtor filed a reply.
      
      The crux of the dispute relates to the nature of the Debtor’s property interest. Debtor appears to assert that she has a 50% equitable interest in the property. Debtor asserts that she purchased the property with her daughter because she could not qualify for a loan, and further asserts that she lives at the property and makes mortgage payments.
      
      HOA makes two distinct arguments in its opposition. First, HOA argues that that the lien did not attach to any interest of the Debtor, and, therefore, Debtor cannot avoid the lien. Second, HOA argues that Debtor is not entitled to take an exemption in the property. Regarding this latter argument, the Court notes that a claimed exemption is "presumptively valid." see, e.g., In re Carter, 182 F.3d 1027, 1029 n.3 (9th Cir. 1999). If HOA wants to dispute the claimed exemption of Debtor, it needs to file an
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Young Sil Han Wang
      
      Chapter 7
      objection to the claimed exemption following the procedures of FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4003, if the deadline to do so has not yet run.
      
      Regarding the first argument, HOA is correct that in order to avoid a lien under § 522(f), the debtor must have had an interest in the property at the time that the lien attached. See Farrey v. Sanderfoot, 500 U.S. 291, 296 (1991) ("Therefore, unless the debtor had the property interest to which the lien attached at some point before the lien attached to that interest, he or she cannot avoid the fixing of the lien under the terms of § 522(f)(1)."). This does not appear to be the operative question, however, because it appears that any interest that Debtor possesses in the property predates the recordation of the lien. The question, instead, is, assuming Debtor has an equitable interest in the property, whether HOA’s lien attaches to that interest.
      
      California law now explicitly provides that judgment liens can attach to equitable interests. See CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 697.340. Nevertheless, Debtor was not the entity against which HOA obtained a judgment; the judgment is against Debtor’s daughter. Debtor has not advanced any argument or authority as to why Debtor’s interest in property is subject to the enforcement of a money judgment obtained against Debtor’s daughter. If HOA had obtained a money judgment against Debtor, it is possible that the recordation of the abstract of judgment would operate to fix a lien on Debtor’s equitable interest in real property. But HOA obtained a judgment against Debtor’s daughter, which attaches only to interests of the daughter, and Debtor’s interest does not appear to be subject to the money judgment. Therefore, HOA’s lien never attached to Debtor’s alleged equitable interest, and Debtor, as a result, cannot avoid the lien.
      
      The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      
      Party Information
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      Debtor(s):
      
      Young Sil Han Wang
      
      Chapter 7
      Young Sil Han Wang Represented By Robert G Uriarte
      Movant(s):
      Young Sil Han Wang Represented By Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte
      Trustee(s):
      John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
      11:00 AM
      6:18-10336
      
      Eduvina Juanita Paredes Leon
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #7.00 Motion to Dismiss Case for Abuse and Dismiss Case with Re-Filing Bar EH
      Docket 8
      Tentative Ruling:
      3/7/18
      BACKGROUND
      On January 17, 2018, Eduvina Leon ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Debtor had previously filed two bankruptcies in the previous eighteen months, both of which were quickly dismissed. On February 1, 2018, UST filed a motion to dismiss case with a re-filing bar.
      DISCUSSION
      1. Dismissal
        
        11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1) permits the Court to dismiss a Chapter 7 case for abuse. 11 U.S.C.
        § 707(b)(3)(A) states:
    2. In considering under paragraph (1) whether the granting of relief would be an abuse of the provisions of this chapter in a case in which the presumption in
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Eduvina Juanita Paredes Leon
    paragraph (2)(A)(i) does not arise or is rebutted, the court shall consider –
    (A) whether the debtor filed the petition in bad faith
    
    Chapter 7
    
    In determining whether a case should be dismissed under § 707(b)(3)(A), the Court considers the totality of the circumstances, but is ultimately instructed to consider whether "the debtor’s intention in filing a bankruptcy petition is inconsistent with the Chapter 7 goals of providing a ‘fresh start’ to debtors and maximizing the return to creditors." In re Mitchell, 357 B.R. 142, 154-55 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2006) (listing factors to be considered in making that determination).
    
    The majority of the Mitchell factors are inapplicable when, as here, a debtor files a skeletal petition that does not provide the Court with sufficient information to apply the Mitchell test. Only factor seven (history of bankruptcy filings) and, possibly, factor nine (egregious behavior) can be assessed when a debtor files a skeletal petition. Both those factors weigh in favor of dismissal when, as here, a debtor repeatedly files skeletal petitions during a short period of time, and does not disclose previous filings. While § 707(a)(1) and (3) provide for dismissal when a debtor fails to fulfill his duties under the Bankruptcy Code, when a debtor repeatedly filed bankruptcy and fails to evince any attempt to comply with the filing requirements, it can be inferred, absent any indication to the contrary, that the debtor’s purpose in filing bankruptcy is not to take advantage of the fresh start. See, e.g., In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648, 655 (Bankr.
    N.D. Cal. 2007) ("Courts generally hold that when a debtor repeatedly files bankruptcy petitions and then repeatedly fails to file schedules or to comply with other requirements, this pattern of behavior is evidence of bad faith and an attempt to abuse the system."). Dismissal under § 707(b)(3) is appropriate in those circumstances.
    1. Re-Filing Bar
  The court is empowered to impose a refiling bar under 11 U.S.C. § 349(a). As
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Eduvina Juanita Paredes Leon
  
  Chapter 7
  COLLIER notes, courts’ analysis of this section is somewhat confused due to confounding "dismissal with prejudice" with "dismissal with injunction against future filings." COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 349.02[3]; compare In re Garcia, 479 B.R. 488 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2012) (denying motion for dismissal with prejudice, but imposing three-year refiling bar) with In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2007) (appearing to equate dismissal with prejudice with an injunction against refiling).
  
  There is also a circuit split concerning whether an injunction on refiling for more than 180 days is allowed under the Bankruptcy Code. Compare In re Frieouf, 938 F.2d 1099 (10th Cir. 1991) (180 days is maximum allowed length of refiling injunction) with Casse v. Key Bank Nat. Ass’n, 198 F.3d 327 (2nd Cir. 1999) (injunction against filing for more than 180 days permissible). 11 U.S.C. § 349(a) reads:
  
  Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise, the dismissal of a case under this title does not bar the discharge, in a later case under this title, of debts that were dischargeable in the case dismissed; nor does the dismissal of a case under this title prejudice the debtor with regard to the filing of a subsequent petition under this title, except as provided in section 109(g) of this title.
  
  The disagreement revolves around whether the qualifier "Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise" modifies the content after the semi-colon. In re Leavitt noted this disagreement, but since the court was dealing with a dismissal with prejudice, rather than an injunction against refiling, it did not resolve the issue. 209 B.R. 935, 942 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997). Within the Ninth Circuit, it appears the trend is to adopt the reasoning of the Second Circuit and allow injunctions for more than 180 days. See e.g. In re Velasques, 2012 WL 8255582 at *3 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2012).
  
  Here, Debtor has filed four skeletal bankruptcies in the previous two years and failed to disclose the previous filings. As noted above, the Court has determined that Debtor’s behavior is sufficient to warrant dismissal for bad faith and the Court finds the requested one year refiling bar to be appropriate.
  
  Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose is deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Eduvina Juanita Paredes Leon
  
  Chapter 7
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eduvina Juanita Paredes Leon Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
  Abram Feuerstein esq
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-13012
  
  Issa M Musharbash
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al
  
  #8.00 CONT Status conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01138. Complaint to Determine Non-Dischargeability of Debt by Phillip Musharbash , Violette Musharbash against Issa M Musharbbash , Amal Musharbbash
  
  From: 9/20/17, 2/7/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Defendant(s):
  Issa M Musharbash Pro Se
  Amal Musharbash Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Plaintiff(s):
  Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
  Violette Musharbash Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:12-37346
  
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:13-01111 Vega v. Barrios
  
  #9.00 Opposition to Claim of Exemption (Wage Garnishment) EH
  Docket 46
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By David H Chung
  Defendant(s):
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By
  Andrew Edward Smyth
  Plaintiff(s):
  Crystal Vega Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-11635
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al
  
  #10.00 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment or Alternatively Partial Summary Adjudication
  
  Also #11 EH
  Docket 68
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/7/2018
  1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    
    On February 26, 2016, Sam & Greeta Dason (Sam, individually, "Dason") (collectively, "Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On August 22, 2016, Juddy Olivares & Eric Panitz (individually, "Olivares" and "Panitz") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint against Dason to determine dischargeability of debt (11
    U.S.C. § 523(a)(6)) and for attorney’s fees. On September 20, 2016, the complaint was amended. On January 11, 2017, the Court dismissed Panitz from the complaint. On March 7, 2017, Olivares filed her second amended complaint.
    
    On August 9, 2017, Dason filed an answer and a counter-claim1 against Olivares. On October 2, 2017, Olivares filed her answer to the counter-claim. On January 19, 2018, Olivares filed the instant motion for summary judgment. On February 13, 2018, Dason filed his opposition to the motion for summary judgment. On February 21, 2018, Olivares filed her reply.
    
    The Court notes that Dason has conceded that his counter-claim is moot in light of this Court’s order annulling the automatic stay. As a result of this concession, it is the Court’s intention to dismiss the counter-claim in the absence of any objection from Dason.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
  2. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Olivares began working as a dental assistant in 2010 for Colton Dental Group, the business name of Dason’s dental corporation, Sam Daniel Dason, DDS ("Dason DDS"). Olivares states that she "was subjected to offensive sexual comments and inquiries, and other unwelcome, sexually-based, offensive conduct by Defendant." Furthermore, Olivares states that she "was subjected to repeated unwelcome sexual touching at the hands of Defendant," which is extensively detailed in the complaint and the motion for summary judgment. On January 17, 2013, Olivares left early and did not return to work. On February 26, 2016, the San Bernardino County Superior Court entered a judgment against Dason and Dason DDS in the amount of
    $1,724,996.34 (the "Judgment").2 The judgment contained the following components:
    1. $300,000 for past emotional distress – hostile work environment
    2. $200,000 for past emotional distress – quid pro quo sexual harassment
    3. $500,000 for future emotional distress
    4. $100,000 for punitive damages3
    5. $1,875 for future psychiatric care
    6. $8,125 for future psychological care
    7. $6,735.22 for past lost income
    8. $608,261.12 for attorney’s fees and costs
      Olivares contends that the judgment is non-dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
      § 523(a)(6). Olivares bases her motion for summary judgment both on issue preclusion and the record in this case. Dason argues that the record in this case cannot support summary judgment and that the state court judgment does not contain adequate findings to support issue preclusion.
  3. DISCUSSION
  Olivares requests that the Court apply issue preclusion and find that the Judgment is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The Bankruptcy Code excepts from discharge any debt for "willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity." 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The creditor bears the burden of proving each element of § 523(a)(6) by a preponderance of the evidence. See, e.g., Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 287 (1991).
  To prevail on a claim under § 523(a)(6), a creditor must demonstrate three elements:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  1. willful conduct; (2) malice; and (3) causation. See In re Butcher, 200 B.R. 675, 680 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1996) (quoting In re Apte, 180 B.R. 223, 230 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1995)). A willful injury is a "deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57, 61 (1998). "A malicious injury involves (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse." In re Barboza, 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting In re Jercich, 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir. 2001)).
    
    Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R. BANKR. P. 7056).
    
    The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324. The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.
    
    If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).
    
    A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.
    1. Plaintiff’s State Court Claim
      
      The legal provision under which the relevant portion of the Judgment was based is
      CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(j)(1), which states:
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Sam Daniel Dason
      
      Chapter 7
      
      It is an unlawful employment practice, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification, or, except where based upon applicable security regulations established by the United States or the State of California:
      
      (j)(1) For an employer, labor organization, employment agency, apprenticeship training program or any training program leading to employment, or any other person, because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status, to harass an employee, an applicant, an unpaid intern or volunteer, or a person providing services pursuant to a contract. Harassment of an employee, an applicant, an unpaid intern or volunteer, or a person providing services pursuant to a contract by an employee, other than an agent or supervisor, shall be unlawful if the entity, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. An employer may also be responsible for the acts of nonemployees, with respect to sexual harassment of employees, applicants, unpaid interns or volunteers, or persons providing services pursuant to a contract in the workplace, if the employer, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. In reviewing cases involving the acts of nonemployees, the extent of the employer’s control and any other legal responsibility that the employer may have with respect to the conduct of those nonemployees shall be considered. An entity shall take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring. Loss of tangible job benefits shall not be necessary in order to establish harassment.
      
      Olivares reference EEOC guidelines which create two categories of sexual harassment: (1) quid pro quo and (2) hostile environment. Olivares also points to case law which acknowledges the two categories. See, e.g., Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v.
      Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 65 (1986); Beyda v. City of Los Angeles, 65 Cal. App. 4th 511, 516-517 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) ("There are two recognized categories of sexual harassment claims. The first is quid pro quo harassment, where a term of employment or employment itself is conditioned upon submission to unwelcome sexual advances. The second, and the one at issue in this case, is hostile work environment, where the harassment is sufficiently pervasive so as to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive work environment.") (citations and quotations omitted).
      
      The delineation of two separate categories of sexual harassment is relevant and important here. First, the Court notes that the Judgement references Olivares’s claim for "Hostile Work Environment and Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harssament," and the state
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Sam Daniel Dason
      
      Chapter 7
      court specifically identified separate damages for "past emotional distress hostile work environment" and "past emotional distress quid pro quo sexual harassment." [Dkt. No. 70 at pg. 8, lines 1-2]. Because these two categories of sexual harassment implicate different issues and require different findings to be made, issue preclusion may operate differently with respect to each issue.
    2. Issue Preclusion on Plaintiff’s Claim under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6)
      
      Issue preclusion applies in nondischargeability proceedings to bar the relitigation of factual issues that were determined in a prior state court action. See, e.g., Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 284-85, n.11 (1991). To determine the issue-preclusive effect of a California state court's judgment, California preclusion law must be applied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738; Marrese v. Am. Acad. of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 380
      (1985); Gayden v. Nourbakhsh (In re Nourbakhsh), 67 F.3d 798, 800 (9th Cir. 1995). Under California law, the party asserting issue preclusion has the burden of establishing the following "threshold" requirements:
      1. the issue sought to be precluded must be identical to that decided in a former proceeding;
      2. the issue must have been actually litigated in the former proceeding;
      3. it must have been necessarily decided in the former proceeding;
      4. the decision in the former proceeding must be final and on the merits; and,
      5. the party against whom preclusion is sought must be the same as, or in privity with, the party to the former proceeding.
        Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001).
        Additionally, the application of issue preclusion requires a "mandatory ‘additional’ inquiry into whether imposition of issue preclusion would be fair and consistent with sound public policy." In re Khaligh, 338 B.R. 817, 824–25 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2006). As stated by the California Supreme Court
        
        We have repeatedly looked to the public policies underlying the doctrine before concluding that collateral estoppel should be applied in a particular setting. Accordingly, the public policies underlying
        collateral estoppel—preservation of the integrity of the judicial system,
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        promotion of judicial economy, and protection of litigants from harassment by vexatious litigation—strongly influence whether its application in a particular circumstance would be fair to the parties and constitutes sound judicial policy.
        
        Chapter 7
        
        Lucido v. Super. Ct., 51 Cal. 3d 335, 342–43 (Cal. 1990) (internal citations omitted).
        
        Here, the Court’s focus is on the second and third elements of the Harmon test because there is no dispute that the Judgement is final and on the merits, and that the parties are the same. Specifically, the Court is concerned with whether "willfulness" was actually litigated and necessarily decided in state court.4
        
        For a default judgment to be "actually litigated," the material factual issues must have been both raised in the pleadings and necessary to uphold the default judgment.
        Gottlieb v. Kest, 141 Cal. App. 4th 110, 149 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). An express finding need not have occurred if the court in the prior proceeding necessarily decided the issue. Cantrell v. Cal–Micro, Inc. (In re Cantrell), 329 F.3d 1119, 1124 (9th Cir.2003).
        
        Under California law, an issue is necessarily decided when (1) there are explicit findings of an issue made in a judgment or decision, or (2) or when the issue is a conclusion that must have been necessarily decided by the court. Samuels v. CMW Joint Venture (In re Samuels), 273 F. App'x 691, 693 (9th Cir. 2008).
        
        Olivares argues that "[c]ourts analogize quid pro quo sexual harassment to ‘extortion,’ which is not only an intentional tort but is also a crime." [Dkt. No. 68, pg. 14, lines
        24-26]. The Court finds the analogy to be apt. The injury sustained in a quid pro quo sexual harassment claim is a tangible, negative effect on employment terms. See, e.g., Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897, 909 (11th Cir. 1982). The quid pro quo conditioning of these employment terms is, necessarily, an intentional action of the employer. As noted in section III, "willfulness" requires an intentional injury, not merely an intentional act. In the case of quid pro quo sexual harassment, the distinction is illusory – intentionally and negatively conditioning an individual’s employment terms with unwanted sexual advances is the equivalent of intentionally causing an injury. See, e.g., In re Roth, 2014 WL 684630 at *6 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2014) (applying issue preclusion to find quid pro quo sexual harassment to be willful, albeit in a non-default situation). Therefore, that part of the Judgment which deals with quid pro quo sexual harassment contains a finding of "willfulness."
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        
        Chapter 7
        
        The analysis regarding hostile workplace, however, is different. As noted by Olivares, the "hostile workplace" theory of sexual harassment generally requires unwanted sexual advances that have the "effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance." Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 65 (1986). In contrast to the quid pro quo liability, where the injury results from an employer’s intentional reaction or retaliation, the injury under a hostile workplace theory is subjective and dependent upon the employee’s perspective. An employer is certainly capable of unintentionally creating a hostile work environment.
        
        The issue preclusion section of Olivares’s motion for summary judgment focuses on the quid pro quo theory of sexual harassment. The Court agrees with Olivares’s that "willfulness," as it is used in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6), is implicit within a judgment for quid pro quo sexual harassment. But it is not necessarily implicit in a judgment under the "hostile workplace" theory of sexual harassment – the hostile workplace could be created negligently or unintentionally, based on incorrect assumptions of the employer.
        
        Dason has not advanced any argument why the application of collateral estoppel to the facts of this specific case would not be "fair and consistent with sound public policy." Dason’s opposition concedes Dason was aware that a trial was scheduled and the date when the trial would occur. Yet, after three years of litigation, no appearance was made on behalf of Dason at the trial. Given the extensive litigation that occurred in state court and the fact that the non-appearance of Dason at trial was due to a conscious choice, and part of a deliberate litigation strategy, the Court concludes that application of issue preclusion would continue the preserve the integrity of the judicial system and promote judicial economy. Thus, partial application of issue preclusion would further the policy and interests underlying the doctrine. See, e.g., In re Baldwin, 249 F.3d 912, 919-920 (9th Cir. 2001) (describing policies underlining collateral estoppel).
    3. Absence of a Genuine Issue of Material Fact
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Olivares alternatively argues that the record in this case is sufficient to warrant summary judgment independent of the state court judgment. The Court disagrees. The record in this case essentially consists of: (1) Olivares’s extensive and detailed description of the alleged sexual harassment; and (2) Dason’s denial of the allegations. After the partial application of issue preclusion noted above, the only remaining factual issue is whether the "willfulness" requirement of § 523(a)(6) is satisfied as to that part of the Judgment which arises from a hostile workplace theory of sexual harassment. Here, the Court is simply presented with competing declarations from Dason and Olivares which assert, respectively, that Dason did not intend to create a hostile workplace environment and that it can be inferred that Dason had such an intention. Apart from those declarations, the record contains two pages of a deposition of Cesar Espinoza stating that Olivares complained that Dason grabbed her posterior at some point in time. Given the paucity of the existing record and the unambiguously contradictory declarations of Dason and Olivares, the Court concludes that summary judgment is inapplicable on this record.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT summary judgment as to the Judgment in so far as the Judgment relates to a quid pro quo theory of sexual harassment and DENY summary judgment in so far as the Judgment relates to a hostile workplace theory of sexual harassment for failure to satisfy the "willfulness" requirement of § 523(a)(6). The Court may order briefing regarding the apportionment of damages that are not specifically assigned to one category.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Defendant(s):
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Movant(s):
  Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
  Juddy Olivares Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
  2:00 PM
  6:16-11635
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al
  
  #11.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Amended Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason; 68- Dischargeability - 523(a)(6) Willful and Malicious Injury
  
  From: 11/2/16, 1/4/17, 3/1/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17, 1/24/18
  
  Also #10 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Defendant(s):
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Plaintiff(s):
  Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
  12:30 PM
  6:12-25054
  
  James Edward Bierly and Betty Ann Bierly
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Motion For Wavier of Financial Course Requirement of Deceased Co Debtor EH
  Docket 112
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/08/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On June 22, 2012, James and Betty Bierly (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtors have reached the end of their chapter 13 case. However, during the pendency of the case, James Bierly passed away.
  
  On January 26, 2018, Debtor Wife Betty Bierly moved this Court for a waiver of the financial course requirement for her deceased husband ("Motion"). The Motion was properly served and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Section 1328(g)(2) exempts certain debtors from the requirement that an instructional course concerning personal financial management be completed as a condition of receipt of a discharge. Section 1328(g)(2) applies specifically to debtors that are unable to complete the requirements because of "incapacity, disability, or active military duty in a military combat zone." 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(4).
  
  In In re Trembulak, 362 B.R. 205, 207 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2007), the Court analyzed the requirement that debtors complete a financial management course in the context of section 727 and the policies underlying receipt of a discharge. The Trembulak Court analyzed cases in which debtors had been excused from the
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  James Edward Bierly and Betty Ann Bierly
  
  Chapter 13
  requirement and determined that
  [C]learly the Debtor herein cannot participate in an instructional course on personal financial management and obviously such a course will not aid the Debtor in avoiding future financial distress. It seems palpably obvious that if a financial management course would be meaningless for an 81 year old, hearing-impaired debtor, suffering from prostate cancer, then such a course would likewise offer even less benefit to a deceased debtor.
  Id. The Court concurs with, and adopts the analysis of the Trembulak Court.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion exempting James Bierly from the § 1328(g) financial management course requirement.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  James Edward Bierly Represented By Hector C Perez
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Betty Ann Bierly Represented By Hector C Perez
  Movant(s):
  James Edward Bierly Represented By Hector C Perez
  Betty Ann Bierly Represented By Hector C Perez
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  James Edward Bierly and Betty Ann Bierly
  
  Chapter 13
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:30 PM
  6:12-31792
  
  Jesse Delgado and Rocio Delgado
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Order to appear and show cause why Sundee Teeple should not be sanctioned for filing a frivolous motion
  
  EH
  
  Docket 175
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jesse Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Rocio Delgado Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (SA) Cohen (TR)
  12:30 PM
  6:18-11080
  
  Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.10 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY (Real Property: located at 970 Winston Circle, Corona CA 92881)
  
  MOVANT: EDGARDO ARANDA AND KELLEY ARANDA
  
  From: 2/27/18, 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 13
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/08/2018
  The Court has reviewed the Debtors' supplemental declaration and finds cause to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  
  2/27/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. The Court finds that Debtors have not provided clear and convincing evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption arising under § 362(c)(3)(C) that this case was not filed in good faith. Specifically, the motion does not address the reasons the previous case was dismissed. Instead the motion and Debtor’s declaration repeatedly recite that the Debtors are willing and able to make their plan payment without any specificity or detail being provided.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Paul Lee to personally appear.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
  
  Chapter 13
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee
  Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:12-27553
  
  Mary Black-Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 11/9/17, 1/11/18, 2/8/18 EH
  
  Docket 56
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mary Black-Williams Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:12-35294
  
  Penelope Ann Young
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 11/9/17 EH
  Docket 71
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Penelope Ann Young Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:12-36522
  
  Jacquelyn Anna Palmer
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 12/14/17, 2/8/18 EH
  Docket 79
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jacquelyn Anna Palmer Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:31 PM
  6:12-37001
  
  Eleanor L. Harvey
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Due to Material Default EH
  Docket 117
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Eleanor L. Harvey Represented By
  Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Michael Smith
  Sundee M Teeple
  Movant(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  12:32 PM
  6:17-14501
  
  Julie Lynn Salazar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  From: 7/6/17, 10/5/17, 10/26/17, 12/14/17, 12/21/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19719
  
  Frank J Cordova
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE REASSIGNED TO JUDGE YUN
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Frank J Cordova Represented By Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19722
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with FCI Lender Services, 2005 Residential Trust 3-2, Countrywide Bank FSB
  HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 1/4/18, 2/8/18 Also #10
  EH
  
  Docket 14
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  01/04/2018
  Summary of the Motion:
  Notice: Proper
  Opposition: Yes
  Address: 24420 Robie Ct in Moreno Valley, CA 92551
  First trust deed: $277,791.30 with Bank of America
  Second trust deed (to be avoided): $115,756.89 with 2005 Residential Trust 3-2 ("Creditor")
  Fair market value: $270,000 (Appraisal)
  
  TENTATIVE
  Creditor by its opposition requests a continuance of at least 30 days to obtain a verified appraisal of the Property.
  
  Debtor argues that because the Motion must be filed and heard prior to confirmation of the chapter 13 plan, a continuance of the Motion cannot be granted. However, the Debtor presumes that the plan will be confirmed on January 4, 2018. It is common practice to permit secured creditors an opportunity to obtain an appraisal prior to ruling on a motion to avoid junior lien. Debtor provides no authority for the proposition that such a continuance would be unjustified in circumstances such as these nor has the Debtor articulated any legal prejudice that would result from the
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  continuance.
  
  In sum, the Court finds no merit in the Debtor’s reply. A continuance of the Motion for the appraisal is warranted.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Movant(s):
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19722
  
  Daniel Verduzco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/8/18
  Also #9 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Daniel Verduzco Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19892
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Motion to Value Personal Property Re: 2014 Volkswagen Tiguan From: 2/22/18
  Also #12 EH
  Docket 20
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Movant(s):
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19892
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/22/18
  Also #11 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  03/08/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  VW objects to Debtor’s plan because it proposes a 1.5% interest rate (which is the contract rate). VW asserts that under Till it should receive 7.25% (representing prime of 4.25 plus a 3% increase for the additional risk factor).
  
  In Till v. SCS Credit Corp., the Supreme Court held that the formula approach, requiring adjustment of prime national interest rate based on risk of nonpayment, was the appropriate method for determining adequate rate of interest on a crammed down loan. 541 U.S. 465 (2004).
  
  The approach begins by looking to the national prime rate. Id. at 478-479. The approach then requires a bankruptcy court to adjust the prime rate according to the bankrupt debtors’ risk of nonpayment. Id. The appropriate size of that risk adjustment depends on such factors as (1) the circumstances of the estate, (2) the nature of the security, and (3) the duration and feasibility of the reorganization plan. Additionally, the court must hold a hearing at which the debtor and any creditors may present evidence about the appropriate risk adjustment. Finally, the Court indicated that creditors should bear the evidentiary burden as to risk.
  
  Here, VW’s claim on the Petition Date was $17,876.35 (per VW’s proof of claim). The Plan proposes to cramdown VW’s claim, paying VW in full only on the secured portion of its claim. Thus, under Till, VW as the holder of a crammed down loan is entitled to an adjusted interest rate.
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  In Till, the Supreme Court indicated that a court choosing a cramdown interest rate need not consider the creditor's individual circumstances, such as its prebankruptcy dealings with the debtor or the alternative loans it could make if permitted to foreclose. Id. Rather, the court should aim to treat similarly situated creditors similarly, and to ensure that an objective economic analysis would suggest the debtor's interest payments will adequately compensate all such creditors for the time value of their money and the risk of default. Id. Thus, here, the Debtor is incorrect that simply because she has proposed a 100% plan and has a pre-bankruptcy contract rate of 1.5%, VW should simply accept that pre-bankruptcy rate. Such rate simply does not recognize the reality acknowledged by the Supreme Court that "on the one hand, the fact of the bankruptcy establishes that the debtor is overextended and thus poses a significant risk of default and on the other hand, the postbankruptcy obligor is no longer the individual debtor but the court-supervised estate, and the risk of default is thus somewhat reduced."
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that under Till, the interest rate can and should be adjusted to account for the different risk profile presented by the Debtor now as opposed to when the Debtor obtained the contract rate. At a minimum, VW’s Objection should be SUSTAINED such that it should receive at least the 4.25% prime interest rate. Given the risk of default of a borrower in bankruptcy, the Court would be inclined to add an additional percentage point to the prime rate, for a total interest rate of 5.25% for VW.
  
  2/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 29, 2017, Lena Wade ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition and plan. On December 28, 2017, Debtor filed an amended plan. On January 11,
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  2018, Trustee filed an objection to confirmation. Among the grounds listed in Trustee’s objection was that confirmation should contain a condition that prohibited Debtor from modifying the plan to pay less than 100% to unsecured creditors unless Debtor paid all disposable income into the plan. On January 25, 2018, Debtor filed her opposition to Trustee’s objection. On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a reply brief.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Trustee requests that this Court adopt the holding of In re McCarthy, 554 B.R. 388 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2016). The Court declines to do so for the reasons that follow.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) enumerates plan confirmation requirements. If the confirmation requirements are satisfied then "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm [the] plan." Id. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) states:
  
  (b)(1) If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan ---
  1. the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or
  2. the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan.
  Subject to the discussion below, for the sake of analysis, the Court will assume § 1325(b)(1) is applicable here. Trustee argues in section II.D of its brief that once
  § 1325(b)(1) is invoked, confirmation is discretionary:
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  However, the language in § 1325(b) is permissive and, therefore, more discretionary – "the court MAY not confirm unless . . ." Therefore, debtor’s argument that the court MUST confirm the plan because it meets the requirements of § 1325 is not supported by the language of the statute. In fact, the Chapter 13 Trustee would argue that it is the discretionary language of
  § 1325(b)(1) that allows the court, under its equitable powers, to order a conditional confirmation as the court did in McCarthy.
  
  [Dkt. No. 24, pg. 10, lines 1-8] (parenthesis omitted) (italicization added for emphasis). Trustee’s assertion that the language of § 1325(b) is permissive and discretionary, however, is statutorily incorrect. 11 U.S.C. § 102(4) states: "’may not’ is prohibitive, and not permissive." As a result, the foundation of Trustee’s position appears to rest on a misreading of the statute.
  
  Instead, the Code provides for the following analysis at plan confirmation: (1) if the debtor has satisfied the § 1325(a) confirmation requirements and no objection is received, then the Court must confirm the plan; (2) if an objection is received and the debtor has not satisfied § 1325(b)(1), the Court cannot confirm the plan; and (3) if an objection is received and the debtor has satisfied § 1325(a)-(b)(1), then the Court must confirm the plan. See, e.g., 8 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.11[e] (16th ed. 2016) ("If an objection to confirmation is filed under section 1325(b)(1), the objection must be denied when ‘the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim.’ . . . [I]f the plan provides that the claims are to be paid in full, the trustee cannot demand that the debtors devote all of their projected disposable income each month to payment of claims in order to pay them more quickly.").
  
  Even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination by the Court, the nature of the objection filed by Trustee is inadequate to invoke the § 1325(b)(1) requirements. See, e.g., In re Torres, 193 B.R. 319, 322-23 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1996) ("in order for that subsection [§1325(b)(1)(B)] to become applicable to confirmation, an objection to confirmation must be made alleging that a debtor is not devoting all disposable income to the plan for a minimum period of three years."). As a result,
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination, the standard would be irrelevant in this case.
  
  Apart from the statutory interpretations problems with the Trustee’s argument, the Court finds that policy and equitable considerations weigh against Trustee’s position. The Court notes that the disposable income requirement is disjunctive: either the debtor must pledge all disposable income to the plan or the debtor must pay unsecured creditors in full. The Trustee does not dispute that Debtor has satisfied the disjunctive test.
  
  Ultimately, the Trustee relies upon the Court’s § 105 equitable powers in support of the request at issue. Rarely will it be the case, however, that the equities will in favor of creating a fixed rule binding for years regardless of changes in circumstances. The review of a proposed plan modification is generally a highly equitable endeavor that emphasizes the totality of the circumstances. Replacing that equitable analysis with a rigid rule not provided for by the Code is simply inequitable.
  
  The Court does agree, however, that a plan term requiring Debtors in a 100% plan to have to account for excess disposable income, in the even they later file a motion to modify, is of benefit.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-19894
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  2/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 29, 2017, William & Carla Walker ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On December 7, 2017, Debtors filed a Chapter 13 plan. On January 11, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to confirmation. Among the grounds listed in Trustee’s objection was that confirmation should contain a condition that prohibited Debtors from modifying the plan to pay less than 100% to unsecured creditors unless Debtor paid all disposable income into the plan. On January 25, 2018, Debtors filed their opposition to Trustee’s objection. On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a reply brief.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Trustee requests that this Court adopt the holding of In re McCarthy, 554 B.R. 388 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2016). The Court declines to do so for the reasons that follow.
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) enumerates plan confirmation requirements. If the confirmation requirements are satisfied then "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm [the] plan." Id. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) states:
  
  (b)(1) If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan ---
  1. the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or
  2. the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan.
  Subject to the discussion below, for the sake of analysis, the Court will assume § 1325(b)(1) is applicable here. Trustee argues in section II.D of its brief that once
  § 1325(b)(1) is invoked, confirmation is discretionary:
  
  However, the language in § 1325(b) is permissive and, therefore, more discretionary – "the court MAY not confirm unless . . ." Therefore, debtor’s argument that the court MUST confirm the plan because it meets the requirements of § 1325 is not supported by the language of the statute. In fact, the Chapter 13 Trustee would argue that it is the discretionary language of
  § 1325(b)(1) that allows the court, under its equitable powers, to order a conditional confirmation as the court did in McCarthy.
  
  [Dkt. No. 24, pg. 10, lines 1-8] (parenthesis omitted) (italicization added for emphasis). Trustee’s assertion that the language of § 1325(b) is permissive and discretionary, however, is statutorily incorrect. 11 U.S.C. § 102(4) states: "’may not’ is prohibitive, and not permissive." As a result, the foundation of Trustee’s position appears to rest on a misreading of the statute.
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Instead, the Code provides for the following analysis at plan confirmation: (1) if the debtor has satisfied the § 1325(a) confirmation requirements and no objection is received, then the Court must confirm the plan; (2) if an objection is received and the debtor has not satisfied § 1325(b)(1), the Court cannot confirm the plan; and (3) if an objection is received and the debtor has satisfied § 1325(a)-(b)(1), then the Court must confirm the plan. See, e.g., 8 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.11[e] (16th ed. 2016) ("If an objection to confirmation is filed under section 1325(b)(1), the objection must be denied when ‘the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim.’ . . . [I]f the plan provides that the claims are to be paid in full, the trustee cannot demand that the debtors devote all of their projected disposable income each month to payment of claims in order to pay them more quickly.").
  
  Even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination by the Court, the nature of the objection filed by Trustee is inadequate to invoke the § 1325(b)(1) requirements. See, e.g., In re Torres, 193 B.R. 319, 322-23 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1996) ("in order for that subsection [§1325(b)(1)(B)] to become applicable to confirmation, an objection to confirmation must be made alleging that a debtor is not devoting all disposable income to the plan for a minimum period of three years."). As a result, even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination, the standard would be irrelevant in this case.
  
  Apart from the statutory interpretations problems with the Trustee’s argument, the Court finds that policy and equitable considerations weigh against Trustee’s position. The Court notes that the disposable income requirement is disjunctive: either the debtor must pledge all disposable income to the plan or the debtor must pay unsecured creditors in full. The Trustee does not dispute that Debtor has satisfied the disjunctive test.
  
  Ultimately, the Trustee relies upon the Court’s § 105 equitable powers in support of the request at issue. Rarely will it be the case, however, that the equities will in favor of creating a fixed rule binding for years regardless of changes in circumstances. The review of a proposed plan modification is generally a highly equitable endeavor that
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Edward Walker and Carla Sue Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  emphasizes the totality of the circumstances. Replacing that equitable analysis with a rigid rule not provided for by the Code is simply inequitable.
  
  The Court does agree, however, that a plan term requiring Debtors in a 100% plan to have to account for excess disposable income, in the even they later file a motion to modify, is of benefit.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Edward Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carla Sue Walker Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:17-20652
  
  Marian Amelia Pagano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Marian Amelia Pagano Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10003
  
  Lenton T. Hutton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Brian Nomi
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10012
  
  Ronny DePasquale and Trudy DePasquale
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ronny DePasquale Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Trudy DePasquale Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10016
  
  Marilyn N Koehnlein
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marilyn N Koehnlein Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10022
  
  Lourdes Yanga
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lourdes Yanga Represented By Alon Darvish
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10023
  
  Evangelina Leyva
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Evangelina Leyva Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10039
  
  Shelley R. Long
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Shelley R. Long Represented By
  James D. Hornbuckle
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10066
  
  Amanuel Montrell Bradberry and Katrina Lashall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Amanuel Montrell Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Katrina Lashall Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:32 PM
  6:18-10407
  
  Caesar A Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Motion by United States Trustee to Dismiss Chapter 13 Case with a Re-filing Bar
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/08/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On January 19, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Caesar Rodriguez (the "Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief.
  
  The docket reflects that the Debtor has filed numerous prior cases as follows:
  1. Case Number 17-13967, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 05/11/2017, Dismissed for Failure to File Information on 05/30/2017;
  2. Case Number 17-12050, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 03/16/2017, Dismissed for Failure to File Information on 04/03/2017;
  3. Case Number 16-16171, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 07/11/2016, Dismissed for Failure to File Information on 07/29/2016;
  4. Case Number 16-14241, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 05/11/2016, Dismissed for Failure to File Information on 05/31/2016;
  5. Case Number 13-10260, Chapter 13 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 01/07/2013, Dismissed for Other Reason on 02/21/2013; and
  6. Case Number 10-29451, Chapter 7 filed in California Central Bankruptcy on 06/23/2010, Standard Discharge on 10/12/2010.
  On February 5, 2018, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Dismiss Chapter 7 Case with a Re-Filing Bar (the "Motion"). No opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  As set forth by the Ninth Circuit in In re Leavitt, 171 F.3d 1219, 1224 (9th Cir.
  1999), bad faith, as cause for the dismissal of a Chapter 13 petition with prejudice,
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Caesar A Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  involves the application of the "totality of the circumstances" test. In re Eisen, 14 F.3d 469, 470 (9th Cir.1994). The Ninth Circuit has instructed courts deciding whether to dismiss a Chapter 13 petition to consider the following factors:
  1. whether the debtor "misrepresented facts in his [petition or] plan, unfairly manipulated the Bankruptcy Code, or otherwise [filed] his Chapter 13 [petition or] plan in an inequitable manner," id. (citing In re Goeb, 675 F.2d 1386, 1391 (9th Cir.1982));
  2. "the debtor's history of filings and dismissals," id. (citing In re Nash, 765 F.2d 1410, 1415 (9th Cir.1985));
  3. whether "the debtor only intended to defeat state court litigation," id. (citing In re Chinichian, 784 F.2d 1440, 1445–46 (9th Cir.1986)); and
  4. whether egregious behavior is present, In re Tomlin, 105 F.3d 933, 937 (4th Cir.1997); In re Bradley, 38 B.R. 425, 432 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1984).
  A finding of bad faith does not require fraudulent intent by the debtor.
  
  [N]either malice nor actual fraud is required to find a lack of good faith. The bankruptcy judge is not required to have evidence of debtor ill will directed at creditors, or that debtor was affirmatively attempting to violate the law-malfeasance is not a prerequisite to bad faith.
  
  In re Powers, 135 B.R. 980, 994 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1991) (relying on In re Waldron, 785 F.2d 936, 941 (11th Cir.1986)).
  
  The UST asserts based on the Debtor’s petition and history of cases that (1) the Debtor failed to disclose several of his prior cases; (2) that the Debtor’s schedules lists only one creditor, Ditech, which may be an indication that the case was filed with the sole purpose of attempting to delay a foreclosure or unlawful detainer proceeding;
  (3) a second debtor named Roxane Arambula has filed three recent cases within a three month period and has listed the same address on her petition as the address of the Debtor; (4) the Debtor has had at least four cases dismissed for failure to file complete schedules.
  
  Here, the record set forth by the UST demonstrates the Debtor’s bad faith willingness to use inappropriate filings to forestall his creditors. This bad faith finding
  12:32 PM
  CONT...
  
  Caesar A Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  is further supplemented by evidence that the Debtor has worked in concert with Ms. Arambula to prevent hinder and delay their creditors. Based on the foregoing facts, including a record of noncompliance with the duties of a debtor, the UST has established that dismissal is warranted and that a two-year bar under the Court’s § 105 and § 349 authority is appropriate.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the Motion in its entirety DISMISSING the Debtor’s case and imposing a two-year re-filing bar.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Caesar A Rodriguez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
  Abram Feuerstein esq
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:13-14560
  
  David Sandoval and Mary Celine Sandoval
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 79
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David Sandoval Represented By
  Bryant C MacDonald
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Mary Celine Sandoval Represented By
  Bryant C MacDonald
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:16-19656
  
  Jerome D Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/15/18
  EH
  
  Docket 54
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jerome D Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:33 PM
  6:17-16455
  
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/1/18
  EH
  
  Docket 43
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  9:30 AM
  6:03-15174
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:12-01498 Morschauser v. Continental Capital LLC et al
  
  #1.00 Evidentiary hearing re Order to Show Cause Why Jesse Bojorquez, American Business Investments, William Morschauser, Stephen Collias and Continental Capital, LLC, Should Not Be Sanctioned for Facilitating Payment to and/or Receiving Payment for Broker Services in Contravention of this Court's August 11, 2003, Sale Order
  
  Also #2 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/22/18 AT 9:30 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  09/13/2017
  On August 16, 2017, the Court entered its Order Imposing Sanctions ("Sanctions Order") as to Defendant/Cross-Defendants Continental Capital, LLC, Stephen Collias, and their Counsel, for failure to comply with the deadlines imposed by the Court in its May 16, 2017, Order to Show Cause ("OSC"). The Sanctions Order included: (1) a sanction payable to the Court of $500; and (2) attorney’s fees for time spent attending the July 26, 2017, hearing and for time spent preparing declarations in support of the fee sanctions. The Court docketed receipt of the $500 sanctions due to the Court on August 28, 2017.
  On August 16, 2017, the sanctioned parties filed their request that the Court reverse its Sanctions Order as to attorney fees, and their alternative opposition to the reasonableness of the fees sought by Bojorquez and Morschauser. The fees sought by each party is set forth below:
  BOJORQUEZ FEE BREAKDOWN
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Hourly Rate for Lawrence Kuhlman: $350/hr
  
  Preparation for Status Conference, including call with client re: same – 1.7 hours Travel to/Attendance at Status Conference – 3.9 hours
  Draft Declaration re: Fees - .3 hours Total: 5.9 hour x 350 =$2,065 MORSCHAUSER FEE BREAKDOWN
  Hourly Rate for Reid Winthrop: $595
  
  Preparation for Status Conference, including call with client re: same – 2.8 hours Travel to/Attendance at Status Conference - 4.3 hours
  Draft Declaration re: Fees - .5 hours
  
  Total: 7.6 hours x $595 = $4,522 (Note: a miscalculation of the summation resulted in a request of $4,581.50 for 7.7 hours in the Winthrop Declaration).
  As a threshold matter, the sanctioned parties seek reversal of the fee sanctions award. However, there is no authority or analysis provided as to why the modification of the Court’s sanctions award is appropriate under Rule 60. Separately, the Court is not satisfied that the explanation for why the error occurred would warrant setting aside of the sanctions award. Additionally, although the sanctioned parties argue that the "Status Conference" on the OSC would have occurred with or without the error, the Court disagrees that no time was wasted. In particular, the late filing of the responsive pleading by the sanctioned parties necessitated a further hearing for the other parties to reply in order to provide the Court and parties with all of the briefing to permit an informed discussion regarding the bounds of an evidentiary hearing.
  Finally, as to the fees requested, the Court finds that the billing rates are reasonable and the sanctioned parties have provided no evidence to controvert the
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  reasonableness of the hourly rates. However, the Court shall reduce the fee requests for travel time and time expended in preparation for the July 26 hearing, based on reasonableness of the time entries, reducing 3 hours for Mr. Winthrop and 1.5 hours for Mr. Kuhlman, for a total reduction of $1,758 as to Mr. Winthrop’s fees and a reduction of $525 as to Mr. Kuhlman.
  Thus, Mr. Kuhlman’s fee shall be reduced by $525 to $1,540, and Mr.
  Winthrop’s fee shall be reduced by $1,785 to $2,737.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Devore Stop A General Partners Represented By
  Arshak Bartoumian - DISBARRED - Newton W Kellam
  Devore Stop Represented By
  Hutchison B Meltzer
  Defendant(s):
  Continental Capital LLC Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Stephen Collias Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Jesse Bojorquez Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  American Business Investments Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Mohammed Abdizadeh Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  William G Morschauser Represented By Hutchison B Meltzer Reid A Winthrop
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  9:30 AM
  6:03-15174
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:12-01498 Morschauser v. Continental Capital LLC et al
  
  #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Complaint by William G Morschauser against Continental Capital LLC , Stephen Collias , Jesse Bojorquez , American Business Investments , Mohammed Abdizadeh . (91 (Declaratory judgment)) , (72 (Injunctive relief - other))
  HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 3/11/15, 5/20/15, 7/29/15, 12/16/15, 2/3/16, 3/16/16, 5/11/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 11/16/16, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17
  
  Also #1 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/22/18 AT 9:30 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Devore Stop A General Partners Represented By
  Arshak Bartoumian - DISBARRED - Newton W Kellam
  Devore Stop Represented By
  Hutchison B Meltzer
  Defendant(s):
  Continental Capital LLC Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Stephen Collias Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Jesse Bojorquez Represented By
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Lawrence J Kuhlman Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  
  Chapter 7
  American Business Investments Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  Mohammed Abdizadeh Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  William G Morschauser Represented By Hutchison B Meltzer Reid A Winthrop
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  4:00 PM
  6:18-11212
  
  Diana J Everett
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY
  
  MOVANT: DIANA J. EVERETT
  
  From: 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/06/2018
  
  The Debtor indicates that the case was dismissed for two reasons: (1) the Debtor’s disability income decreased, and (2) the Debtor’s daughter was in a serious accident in November 2017 and the Debtor has been paying her medical and legal fees associated with the accident.
  
  The Debtor’s explanation for the dismissal of the prior case is sufficiently detailed. However, the Motion does not address whether there has been a change in the financial or personal affairs of the Debtor since January 2018 (when the case was dismissed) such that the Debtor is likely to be able to complete her plan going forward. In particular, there is no indication that the medical emergency which resulted in dismissal of the Debtor’s prior case has ended. Additionally, the Debtor now indicates that she is supporting her unemployed domestic partner. The Debtor’s disposable income has decreased from $4,197.72 in her prior case to $704.72 in the current case.
  
  Separately, the Court notes that the Notice of Motion did not specify the identities of the Debtor’s secured creditors as required by the Court’s form motion. As such, notice for the secured creditors is improper.
  4:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Diana J Everett
  
  Chapter 13
  For these reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  4:00 PM
  6:18-11806
  
  Rick's Patio Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #4.00 Emergency Motion for Authorization to Use Cash Collateral and Provide Adequate Protection
  
  EH
  
  Docket 5
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10659
  
  Tena Renee Fry
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 11043 Magnolia Ave Ste 202 Riverside CA 92505
  
  MOVANT: DINESH PATEL, AUTHORIZED AGENT OF ECONO LODGE INN & SUITES IN RIVERSIDE CA
  
  From: 2/27/18, 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 12
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL FILED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tena Renee Fry Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Dinesh Patel Represented By
  Benjamin R Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10490
  
  Everett W Delbridge, III
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2941 South Cucamonga, Avenue Ontario, CA 91761
  
  MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/20/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Everett W Delbridge III Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Represented By
  Christina J O
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20433
  
  Leslie Marie Spaur
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: N 2016 CHEVROLET SPARK; Vin No. KL8CB6SA5GC587815
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/20/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Leslie Marie Spaur Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Megan E Lees
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20271
  
  Jeremy L. Moore and Angelina R. Moore
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Lexus IS250
  
  MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 15
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/20/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  1. and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jeremy L. Moore Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Angelina R. Moore Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
    Movant(s):
    Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
    Austin P Nagel
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Jeremy L. Moore and Angelina R. Moore
    
    Chapter 7
    Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-20145
    
    Willie J Bryant
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 Motion for Relief from Stay re 2 2015 Peterbilt 389-series Tractors 131" 6x4 MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
    EH
    
    Docket 9
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Improper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the motion for improper service. Specifically, Local Rule 4001(c)(1)(C) requires service on the debtor, in addition to the debtor’s attorney. Here, Movant has not served Debtor. The hearing is continued to April 17, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. for Movant to serve Debtor with a copy of the motion and serve all proper parties with a notice of continuance.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Willie J Bryant Represented By Ronald L Brownson
    Movant(s):
    BMO Harris Bank N.A. Represented By Deborah S Cochran
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-19942
    
    Mark Miller
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28625 Willow Rd., Skyforest, CA
    
    MOVANT: THE REO GROUP
    
    EH
    
    Docket 41
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: Late
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. DENY request for relief under § 1301(a) because this is not a Chapter 13 proceeding.
    GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request for adequate protection as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Mark Miller Represented By
    Bruce A Boice
    Movant(s):
    The REO Group, Inc. Represented By Coby Halavais
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Mark Miller
    
    Chapter 7
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-19831
    
    Samuel Canovas Gomez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2004 Nissan Titan Crew Cab-V8, VIN: 1N6AA07B14N501834
    
    MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK
    
    EH
    
    Docket 10
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for relief under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request for relief under ¶ 11.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Samuel Canovas Gomez Represented By Lauren M Foley
    Movant(s):
    Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
    Sheryl K Ith
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-17806
    
    Gerald Curtis Collins and Valerie Cecelia Collins
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35247 Sunnyside Drive, Yucaipa, California 92399
    
    MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 31
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Gerald Curtis Collins Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Valerie Cecelia Collins Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    Movant(s):
    U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
    Armin M Kolenovic
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-16024
    
    Stacy N Reagor
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Domestic Support w/ PofS. ) (Schroer, Manfred)
    
    MOVANT: THEATLAS REAGOR, JR.
    
    EH
    
    Docket 25
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    3/20/18
    
    On July 19, 2017, Stacy Reagor ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 7, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
    
    On January 23, 2018, Debtor’s ex-husband, Theatlas Reagor ("Movant"), filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay. Movant selected an improper hearing date, however, and so the motion was not set for hearing, and a notice to filer was generated. On February 20, 2018, Movant filed an amended notice of hearing. Movant requests relief from the automatic stay to "obtain a State Court Order to enforce reimbursement of one-half of all amounts expended by Movant in regards to medical services for his minor children in accordance with Domestic Support Order dated December 29, 2010, and for modification of Child support." Movant also seeks annulment of the automatic stay.
    
    First, the Court notes that 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(2)(A)(ii) excepts from the automatic stay acts "for the establishment or modification of an order for domestic support obligations." Furthermore, 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(2)(C) provides a mechanism to enforce
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Stacy N Reagor
    
    Chapter 13
    a domestic support obligation which is automatically excepted from the scope of the automatic stay. The combined operation of these two provisions would seem to render the instant motion unnecessary, to the extent the motion seeks prospective relief from the automatic stay. The Court will construe this request as a request for a comfort order to make clear that the stay does not operate to stop enforcement of the support obligations.
    
    Second, while the Court notes that it is unclear what action, if any violated the automatic stay, the Court finds that the application of the Fjeldsted factors warrants annulment of the automatic stay. Specifically, the Court notes that Movant has provided evidence it was not aware of the bankruptcy filing. Furthermore, the Court notes that Debtor was, probably inappropriately, omitted from Debtor’s master mailing matrix in this case. Additionally, the evidence before the Court indicates that Debtor promptly halted his actions in state court upon learning of the bankruptcy filing. Finally, as noted in the paragraph above, it is not clear that the actions of Movant actually violate the automatic stay. For all those reasons, and because Debtor has not opposed the instant motion, which the Court deems to be consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), the Court is inclined to annul the automatic stay.
    
    The Court is inclined to CONFIRM that the automatic stay does not operate to stop enforcement of the support obligations and otherwise ANNUL the automatic stay.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Stacy N Reagor Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Movant(s):
    
    Stacy N Reagor
    
    Chapter 13
    Stacy N Reagor Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-15102
    
    Gwendolyn Washington
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #10.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 977 Allegre Drive, Corona CA 92879
    
    MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK
    
    EH
    
    Docket 54
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
    DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
    Movant(s):
    Wells Fargo Bank, National Represented By Sean C Ferry
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:16-14858
    
    Tony Rene Lee
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Nissan Altima Sedan 4D S I4
    
    MOVANT: CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE
    
    EH
    
    Docket 51
    *** VACATED *** REASON: STIPULATED ORDER ENTERED ON
    3/6/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Tony Rene Lee Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
    Movant(s):
    Capital One Auto Finance, a Represented By Bret D. Allen
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:15-13218
    
    Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #12.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43375 Madison St, Indio, CA 92201
    
    MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18 EH
    Docket 69
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
    Movant(s):
    HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:13-19245
    
    Oscar R Avila and Alice M Avila
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32164 Machado Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530
    
    MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
    
    EH
    
    Docket 104
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Oscar R Avila Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Alice M Avila Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
    Movant(s):
    Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By
    Armin M Kolenovic
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:13-15321
    
    John Douglas Bacon and Monica Marie Bacon
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2938 Pine Grove Dr, Mount Shasta, CA 96067
    
    MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
    
    EH
    
    Docket 54
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    John Douglas Bacon Represented By Andrew Moher
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Monica Marie Bacon Represented By Andrew Moher
    Movant(s):
    Nationstar Mortgage LLC as Represented By Jennifer C Wong
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    John Douglas Bacon and Monica Marie Bacon
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:13-13746
    
    Ronald Andrew Lopez and Lisa Darlene Lopez
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #15.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 11014 San Miguel Way, Montclair, CA 91763
    
    MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 163
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions, if any.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ronald Andrew Lopez Represented By David Lozano
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Lisa Darlene Lopez Represented By David Lozano
    Movant(s):
    U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
    Leslie M Klott Sean C Ferry
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Ronald Andrew Lopez and Lisa Darlene Lopez
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10628
    
    Markus Anthony Boyd
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #16.00 Motion in Individual Ch 11 Case for Order Employing Professional (LBR 2014-1): Nicholas Gebelt as General Bankruptcy Counsel
    
    Also #17 EH
    Docket 35
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On January 26, 2018, Markus Boyd ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On January 30, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to employ Nicholas Gebelt ("Counsel") as bankruptcy counsel, and Counsel filed a statement of disinterestedness.
    
    On February 13, 2018, UST filed an objection to the employment application. UST’s objection related to several fee provisions in Counsel’s retainer agreement.
    Specifically, UST objected to the characterization of the pre-petition retainer as "earned-upon-receipt and nonrefundable," in addition to a few other provisions.
    
    On February 26, 2018, Counsel filed an amended employment application to address the concerns raised by UST. After a review of the amended application, it appears to the Court that Counsel has removed all of the provisions objected to by UST.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Markus Anthony Boyd
    
    Chapter 11
    DISCUSSION
    
    11 U.S.C. § 327(a) states:
    1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the trustee, with the court’s approval, may employ one or more attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, or other professional persons, that do not hold or represent an interest adverse to the estate, and that are disinterested persons, to represent or assist the trustee in carrying out the trustee’s duties under this title.
    Pursuant to 1107(a), Debtor, as a debtor in possessions, has the rights in duties of a trustee. Debtor’s counsel has submitted adequate evidence establishing his disinterestedness in this case. Subject to additional concerns of UST, the Court is inclined to approve the application.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to APPROVE the application.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
    Movant(s):
    Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Markus Anthony Boyd
    
    Nicholas W Gebelt
    
    Chapter 11
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10628
    
    Markus Anthony Boyd
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #17.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
  2. Requiring Status Report Also #16
  EH
  
  Docket 16
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10381
  
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Pursuant to 11 U.S.C sect 1112(b) & Judgment for Quarterly Fees Pursuant to 28 U.S.C sect 1930
  
  Also #19 EH
  Docket 38
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/20/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On January 18, 2018, Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Valley CA, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition.
  
  On February 2, 2018, Vanhoops Holdings LP ("Creditor") filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay. At a hearing on March 6, 2018, the Court substantially granted the Creditor’s motion, and also made a finding that Debtor filed its petition in bad faith. Additionally, at the hearing on March 6, the Court authorized UST to set a hearing on a motion to dismiss on shortened time.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(1) states:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
  
  Chapter 11
  
  Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party I interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4) provides a non-exclusive list of sixteen examples of cause. 11
  U.S.C. § 1112(b)(2) provides certain exceptions for dismissal or conversion for cause.
  
  Here, UST asserts that cause exists pursuant to § 1112(b)(4)(A), which states that cause includes "substantial or continuing loss or diminution of the estate and the absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation." UST asserts that after Creditor obtained relief from stay to foreclosure on certain real property which constitutes the only material asset of Debtor, Debtor has no source of revenue and essentially no assets. The Court agrees that these circumstances constitute cause pursuant to § 1112(b). The Court further finds that neither of the exceptions identified in § 1112(b)
  1. are applicable in this case. Finally, because Debtor does not have material unencumbered assets to distribute to any unsecured creditors, the Court concludes that conversion to Chapter 7 would be fruitless, and, therefore, dismissal is in the best interests of creditors.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and DISMISS the case.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers Represented By
    Odeha L Warren
    Movant(s):
    United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10381
    
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers of Chino Val
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #19.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 3/6/18 Also #18
    EH
    
    Docket 0
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Ohlone Tribe of Carmel First Settlers Represented By
    Odeha L Warren
    2:00 PM
    6:17-19936
    
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #20.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: multiple tractors and trailers
    
    MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
    
    Also #21 EH
    Docket 161
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Movant(s):
    BMO HARRIS BANK N.A. Represented By
    Jennifer Witherell Crastz
    2:00 PM
    6:17-19936
    
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: four tractors and two trailers
    
    MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
    
    Also #20 EH
    Docket 168
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/20/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Movant(s):
    BMO HARRIS BANK N.A. Represented By
    Jennifer Witherell Crastz
    2:00 PM
    6:17-15816
    
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #22.00 Motion to Appoint a Chapter 11 Trustee Also #23
    EH
    
    Docket 173
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
    Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
    Movant(s):
    United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
    2:00 PM
    6:17-15816
    
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #23.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 2/6/18, 2/13/18, 3/6/18 Also #22
    EH
    
    Docket 102
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
    Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
    2:00 PM
    6:13-25794
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    Adv#: 6:17-01286 ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation et a v. Insurance Company
    
    #24.00 Motion to Deposit Funds into Court Registry Plaintiffs Motion for Order Authorizing Deposit of Disputed Funds and Granting Related Interpleader Relief
    
    EH
    
    Docket 30
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Defendant(s):
    Insurance Company Of The West Represented By
    Jennifer Leland David B Shemano Howard J Weg
    Employment Development Represented By
    Elisa B Wolfe-Donato
    Angela Denise McKnight Pro Se
    Steven Schonder Pro Se
    United states of america Represented By Charles Parker
    Carlin Law Group APC Represented By Kevin R Carlin
    Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Represented By
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
    Daniel P Scholz
    
    Chapter 11
    DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
    Melissa Davis Lowe
    Plaintiff(s):
    ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
    Melissa Davis Lowe
    10:00 AM
    6:17-19035
    
    Stacy Aleen Eble
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #1.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Darden Credit Union re 2014 Dodge Charger
    
    From: 3/7/18 Also #2
    EH
    
    Docket 11
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Stacy Aleen Eble Represented By Daniel King
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-19035
    
    Stacy Aleen Eble
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #2.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Darden Credit Union re 2009 GMC Sierra
    
    From: 3/7/18 Also #1
    EH
    
    Docket 13
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Stacy Aleen Eble Represented By Daniel King
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-10522
    
    Joanne Saycon
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #3.00 CONT Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Americredit Financial Services, Inc. Dba GM Financial re 2013 Toyota Prius
    
    From: 3/7/18 EH
    Docket 51
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Joanne Saycon Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:15-16033
    
    Eduardo Garcia
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #4.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 34
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    03/21/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 2,250 Trustee Expenses: $ 309.23
    
    The trustee may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Eduardo Garcia Represented By Sydell B Connor
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:14-18549
    
    Matthew Joseph Pautz and Alice Louise Pautz
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 CONT Order to Show Cause re Bodily Detention Order From: 8/15/17, 9/18/17, 10/18/17, 11/13/17, 11/27/17,1/18/18
    EH
    
    Docket 135
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Per consent of the parties, the Court will issue an order continuing the matter for approximately 30 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Matthew Joseph Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Alice Louise Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
    Trustee(s):
    Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe Samuel J Romero
    11:00 AM
    6:14-13131
    
    Erma Fay Dorn
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 148
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    03/21/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 1,750 Trustee Expenses: $ 646.64
    
    The Trustee may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Erma Fay Dorn Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Kiana Khajeh Dane W Exnowski Katelyn R Knapp
    11:00 AM
    6:13-30477
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #7.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Fee Application Of Goe & Forsythe, LLP As Special Litigation Counsel
    
    Also #8 & #9 EH
    Docket 129
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    03/21/2018
    The Court has reviewed the Application for Fees and Costs under Section 328 and approves on a final basis the following:
    
    G&F Contingency Fee: $200,340 G&F Expenses: $7,969.81
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
    Movant(s):
    Goe & Forsythe, LLP Represented By Robert P Goe
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
    11:00 AM
    6:13-30477
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Fee Application Of Stein, Shostak, Shostak, Pollack & OHara, LLP As Special U.S. Customs Counsel
    
    Also #7 & #9 EH
    Docket 130
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    03/21/2018
    The Court has reviewed the Application for Fees and Costs under Section 328 and approves on a final basis the following:
    
    SSSPO Contingency Fee: $76,917 SSSPO Expenses: $456.97
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
    Movant(s):
    Stein Shostak Shostak Pollack & Represented By
    Elon A Pollack Robert P Goe
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Donald Reid
    
    Chapter 7
    11:00 AM
    6:13-30477
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #9.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Application Of with proof of service for Glassratner Advisor & Capital Group, Financial Advisor, Period: 3/1/2016 to 2/27/2018, Fee: $52,290.00, Expenses: $0.00.
    
    Also #7 & #8 EH
    Docket 131
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    03/21/2018
    The Court has reviewed the Application for Fees and Costs under Section 327 and 330 and approves on a final basis the following:
    
    GlassRatner Fees: $52,290 GlassRatner Expenses: $7,969.81
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
    Movant(s):
    Glassratner Advisor & Capital Represented By Robert P Goe
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Master Design Inc
    
    Donald Reid
    
    Chapter 7
    11:00 AM
    6:13-27611
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #10.00 CONT Objection to Claim #17 by Revere Financial Corporation
    (Holding date)
    
    From: 10/1/14, 11/5/14, 12/3/14, 12/15/14, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 10/21/15, 11/18/15, 12/16/15, 1/13/16, 3/2/16, 5/4/16, 6/1/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16,
    2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 9/20/17
    
    EH
    
    Docket 333
    Tentative Ruling:
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
    Trustee(s):
    Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
    Franklin R Fraley Jr
    11:00 AM
    6:13-26277
    
    Charles Frederick Biehl
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #11.00 CONT Order to show cause re Civil Contempt From: 2/14/18
    EH
    
    Docket 234
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Charles Frederick Biehl Represented By
    Daryl L Binkley - DISBARRED - Steven L Bryson
    Trustee(s):
    John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    Leonard M Shulman
    11:00 AM
    6:13-17565
    
    Bertrand Tenke Kengni
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #12.00 Motion to Enforce Settlement EH
    Docket 41
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Bertrand Tenke Kengni Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
    Movant(s):
    Carisa Kengni Represented By
    W. Derek May
    Trustee(s):
    Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:17-19010
    
    Sara Durham
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:18-01020 SCE Federal Credit Union v. Durham
    
    #13.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint by SCE Federal Credit Union against Sara Durham. (14 ),(14A) priority tax claims)), 62 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Sara Durham Represented By
    Edgar P Lombera
    Defendant(s):
    Sara Durham Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By
    Bruce P. Needleman
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:17-16272
    
    Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:17-01191 Frealy v. Cebadas et al
    
    #14.00 CONT Motion for Default Judgment Against Armando Cabadas, Jose Alfredo Cabadas, Victor Armando Cabadas Soto, and Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez (Dismissed first, third, sixth, and eighth claims on 3/16/18)
    
    From: 1/31/18 Also #15
    EH
    
    Docket 24
    *** VACATED *** REASON: DEFAULT JUDGMENT ENTERED 3/20/18
    Tentative Ruling: 1/31/18
    BACKGROUND
    On October 15, 2015, Martha Loreno Soto Jimenez ("Debtor") and her (ex)husband acquired certain real property located at 1475 Capri Ln., San Jacinto, CA 92583 (the "Property"). On July 20, 2016, a divorce judgment provided that the Property was the separate property of Debtor. On June 22, 2017, Debtor and her (ex)husband transferred the Property to their sons via grant deed. The grant deed states: "This is a bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return.
    
    On July 27, 2017, Debtor filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On September 8, 2017, Trustee filed a complaint for: (1) declaratory relief; (2) avoidance of voidable transfer;
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
    
    Chapter 7
  2. recovery of avoided transfer; (4) sale of interest of co-owner in property of the estate; and (5) turnover of property against Armando Cebadas (Debtor’s husband or ex-husband), Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto (Debtor’s son), Victor Armando Cebadas Soto (Debtor’s son), and Debtor (collectively, "Defendants"). On October 17, 2017, the clerk entered default against Defendants. On January 10, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for default judgment.
  DISCUSSION
  1. Entry of Default
    
    Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
  2. Motion for Default Judgment
    1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
      
      Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
        
        Chapter 7
        
        Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
        
        Here, Trustee served Defendants at the Property. It is unclear, however, whether the property is the "dwelling house or usual place of abode" for Debtor’s (ex)husband and two children. The Court requires additional evidence to establish that the Defendants (other than Debtor) were served in accordance with the requirements of Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 7004(b)(1).
    2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
      
      Assuming Trustee establishing that service was proper, the Court will address the merits of the motion. Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").
      
      Here, the complaint includes nine causes of action: (1) declaratory relief; (2) five separate causes of action for avoidance of voidable transfer; (3) recovery of avoided transfer; (4) sale of interest of co-owner in property of the estate; and (5) turnover of property
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      
      Chapter 7
      Regarding the first cause of action, declaratory relief, the complaint requests a determination that the Property is the community property of Debtor and her ex- husband. Trustee alleges in the complaint that Debtor and Armando acquired their interest in the Property prior to the petition date, while they were married. While this appears true, Trustee has provided additional information in the motion for default judgment, namely a divorce judgment, which indicates that the property is actually the separate property of Debtor. This creates a dilemma because, upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint are to be taken as true. Furthermore, Trustee cannot ask for relief (i.e. a declaration that the Property is Debtor’s separate property) which goes beyond the scope of the relief requested in the complaint. Therefore, the Court cannot grant Trustee’s request for a determination that the Property is separate property. The Court also cannot grant Trustee’s request for a determination that the Property is community property because Trustee has submitted evidence establishing that the Property is in fact not community property.
      
      Regarding the second through sixth causes of action, avoidance of voidable transfer, Trustee has cited three Code provisions authorizing avoidance of the transfer of the Property to Debtor’s sons: §544(b) (with reference to Cal. Civ. Code § 3439.04(a)(1) &(2), §3439.05, and § 3439.07), § 548(a)(1)(A), and § 548(a)(1)(B). The first cause of action for avoidable transfer cites 11 U.S.C. §§ 544(b) and 550(a) and Cal. Code Civ.
      P. §§ 3439.04(a)(1) and 3439.07. Section 544(b) states that a trustee may avoid a transfer of an interest of the debtor that is voidable under applicable law. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 3439.04(a)(1) states that a debtor’s transfer of an interest in property is voidable if the transfer was made "[w]ith actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud" creditors. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that the transfer was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors. 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) is materially identical to Cal. Code Civ. P. § 3439.04(a)(1) so Trustee has also satisfied the former.
      
      Cal. Code Civ. P. § 3439.04(a)(2) provides that a transfer is voidable if the debtor does not receive reasonable equivalent value and either (a) was engaged or about to engage in a transaction for which its remaining assets were unreasonable small or (b)
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      
      Chapter 7
      or believed or reasonably should have believed it would incur debts beyond the debtor’s ability to pay. While the grant deed indicates it was a bona fide gift, and thus no reasonably equivalent value was received, Trustee has not provided sufficient factual allegations to satisfy the latter component of the test. Specifically, there is no factual allegation which supports the contention that Debtor’s assets were unreasonably small for future transactions or that Debtor was about to incur debts beyond the debtor’s ability to pay. 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) is materially identical to Cal. Code Civ. P. § 3439.04(a)(2) so the analysis is the same regarding the former.
      
      Cal. Code Civ. P. § 3439.05 provides that a transfer is voidable as to a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer if the debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value and the debtor was or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value, that Debtor was insolvent as a result of the transfer and that there is a creditor whose claim arose before the transfer.
      
      Regarding recovery of the avoidable transfer, 11 U.S.C. § 550 provides that transfers avoided under §§ 544 and 548 are recoverable from the initial transferee. Trustee’s complaint sufficiently alleges that Debtor’s two sons, named defendants, are the initial transferees, and, therefore Trustee has satisfied § 550.
      
      Regarding Trustee’s request to sell an interest of a co-owner of property under § 363 (h), the Court is inclined to conclude that Trustee’s complaint sufficiently establishes the four statutory requirements.
      
      Finally, regarding Trustee’s request for turnover, Section 542(a) provides for turnover of property of the estate that is of consequential value. Here, Trustee has sufficiently satisfied the requirements of § 542(a) by demonstrating that the Property is property of the estate and that the Property is not of inconsequential value.
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
      
      Chapter 7
    3. Amount of Damages
  Here, Trustee is not requesting any damages, and, therefore, no evidence is required establishing the amount of damages.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Conditioned on Trustee establishing that service on Defendants was proper, the Court is inclined to issue judgment in favor of the Trustee on the second, fourth, fifth, seventh, eight, and ninth claims for relief. The motion for default judgment is denied without prejudice as to the third and sixth claims for relief. The motion for default judgment is denied with prejudice as to the first claim for relief, although to the extent necessary Trustee is free to amend the complaint as to the first claim for relief.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Represented By Marlin Branstetter
  Defendant(s):
  Armando Cebadas Pro Se
  Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Victor Armando Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  6:17-16272
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01191 Frealy v. Cebadas et al
  
  #15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01191. Complaint by Todd A. Frealy against Armando Cebadas, Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto, Victor Armando Cebadas Soto, Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)
  (Dismissed first, third, sixth, and eighth claims on 3/16/18)
  
  From: 11/8/17, 1/31/18 Also #14
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: DEFAULT JUDGMENT ENTERED 3/20/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Represented By Marlin Branstetter
  Defendant(s):
  Armando Cebadas Pro Se
  Jose Alfredo Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Victor Armando Cebadas Soto Pro Se
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Carmela Pagay
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  6:17-14684
  
  Timothy Wayne Lambert
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01026 United States Trustee for the Central District of v. Lambert et al
  
  #16.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01026. Complaint by United States Trustee for the Central District of California, Region 16 against Timothy Wayne Lambert, Lisa Renee Lambert. (Fee Not Required). with adversary cover sheet Nature of Suit: (41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))) (Green, Everett)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Defendant(s):
  Timothy Wayne Lambert Pro Se
  Lisa Renee Lambert Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Plaintiff(s):
  United States Trustee for the Central Represented By
  Everett L Green
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-13649
  
  Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.
  
  #17.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment From: 2/28/18
  EH
  
  Docket 29
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/11/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
  R Creig Greaves
  Defendant(s):
  Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
  R Creig Greaves
  Movant(s):
  Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
  Plaintiff(s):
  Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
  
  Chapter 7
  Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
  2:00 PM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01021 Cisneros v. Ganahl Lumber Company, A California Corporation
  
  #18.00 Status Conference re Complaint by Arturo Cisneros against Ganahl Lumber Company, A California Corporation for Avoidance Of Fradulent Transfers; Recovery Of Avoided Transfer; Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer and other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Defendant(s):
  Ganahl Lumber Company, A Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Plaintiff(s):
  Arturo Cisneros Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  2:00 PM
  6:16-19799
  
  Jaison Vally Surace
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01295 Abbasi v. Surace et al
  
  #19.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Setareh Abbasi, Bruce Dannemeyer, Jaison Vally Surace against Jaison Vally Surace, Walie Qadir, Marym Qadir. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 13 - Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer, 91 - Declaratory judgment, 02 - Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy)
  
  From: 2/15/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17, 11/29/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
  Defendant(s):
  Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
  Walie Qadir Represented By
  Batkhand Zoljargal
  Marym Qadir Represented By
  Batkhand Zoljargal
  Plaintiff(s):
  Setareh Abbasi Represented By
  Bruce Dannemeyer
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Jaison Vally Surace
  
  Bruce Dannemeyer
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
  Anthony A Friedman
  2:00 PM
  6:16-16191
  
  Sheri Tanaka Christopher
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01028 Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Tanaka et al
  
  #20.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01028. Complaint by Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee against Ronald Howard Tanaka, Carolyn Naomi Tanaka, Ryan Satoshi Tanaka, Leora Linda Tanaka, Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Probate Estate. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Sale of Real Property Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h); and (2) Turnover of Property of the Estate Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 542 (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property))
  
  From: 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 8/2/17, 1/24/18, 1/31/18 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/2018
  
  The status conference will be continued to March 21, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sheri Tanaka Christopher Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Defendant(s):
  Ronald Howard Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
  Carolyn Naomi Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Sheri Tanaka Christopher
  
  Chapter 7
  Ryan Satoshi Tanaka Represented By David L Prince
  Leora Linda Tanaka Represented By Phillips S Barry
  Estate of Yaeko Sato, a California Represented By
  David L Prince
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
  Monserrat Morales
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monserrat Morales
  2:00 PM
  6:14-16813
  
  M. A. Tabor
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01128 Frealy v. Trotochau et al
  
  #21.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01128. Complaint by Todd A. Frealy against Robin Sherrie Trotochau, Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). - Complaint: (1) For Breach Of Contract; (2) For Common Counts; (3) To Avoid And Recover Fraudulent Transfers; And (4) To Preserve Recovered Transfers For Benefit Of Debtor's Estate (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy)
  (Stip Judgment with Robin Trotochau 12/4/17)
  (Dismissed as to Defendant Pacific Mortgage Exchange Inc. 3/19/18)
  
  From: 7/20/16, 9/28/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 8/23/17, 9/27/17, 1/31/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/31/2018
  
  The status conference will be continued to March 21, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  M. A. Tabor Represented By
  Judith Runyon
  Defendant(s):
  Robin Sherrie Trotochau Pro Se
  Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc. Represented By
  Leib M Lerner
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  M. A. Tabor
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith
  2:00 PM
  6:13-16964
  
  Narinder Sangha
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha
  
  #22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:13-ap-01171. Complaint by Charles Edward Schrader against Narinder Sangha . willful and malicious injury HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 7/8/15, 11/4/15, 3/2/16, 12/14/16, 12/13/17, 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 7/12/17, 8/2/17, 9/27/17, 10/4/17, 11/1/17, 12/6/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/28/2018
  
  This hearing is vacated. The Status Conference is CONTINUED to March 21, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. The Court has provided notice to the parties of the continuance.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
  Defendant(s):
  Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
  Plaintiff(s):
  Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Narinder Sangha
  
  Chapter 7
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-20260
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al
  
  #1.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc., against Javier Lopez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
  
  From: 5/11/17, 6/22/17, 8/17/17, 10/19/17, 11/9/17, 2/1/18, 2/8/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Defendant(s):
  Javier Lopez Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Carmen Lopez Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Plaintiff(s):
  Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By
  Eamon Jafari
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-20133
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
  Docket 50
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 14, 2016, Deborah Hamernik ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On January 17, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On January 3, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for delinquency. On January 17, 2018, Debtor filed her opposition to the motion to dismiss for delinquency. After no appearance was made on behalf of Debtor at the motion to dismiss, the case was dismissed on January 25, 2018.
  
  On February 14, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to vacate dismissal. On February 15, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating conditional approval of the motion.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Debtor relies on FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, which allows for relief from an order
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  based on "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." Here, Debtor has not identified any "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect" to warrant the application of FRCP Rule 60(b)(1).
  
  The legal basis for Debtor’s assertion that the dismissal order should be vacated is that Debtor’s counsel inadvertently did not appear at the hearing due to an office error. It is well established, however, that "an attorney’s ignorance and carelessness does not provide grounds for Rule 60(b) relief." In re Mercado, 144 B.R. 879, 886 (Bankr.
  C.D. Cal. 1992) (citing Bershad v. McDonough, 469 F.2d 1333, 1337 (7th Cir. 1972). And the mere assertion that counsel did not fulfill its duties, but that such carelessness was inadvertent, is clearly inadequate to support Rule 60(b) relief. See, e.g., In re ACME Motors, Inc., 125 B.R. 702, 703 (Bankr. D.R.I. 1991).
  
  "Rule 60(b) relief is extraordinary." Id. Yet, in this court, a request for relief from a Chapter 13 dismissal order has become ordinary. On occasion, the requests are legally sound; in fact, the Court has a legally proper Rule 60(b) request on its calendar for March 22, 2018.
  
  Here, however, the underlying motion to dismiss was filed in early January. After counsel neglected to appear at the hearing, a motion was filed which essentially states that Debtor has cured some of the arrears, will cure more by the date of this hearing, and will, at a later date, cure the remainder. In essence, Debtor’s current position is that, after her counsel did not appear at the original hearing, two months later she can almost cure the material default.
  
  When a Chapter 13 trustee files a motion to dismiss, a debtor (or his or her counsel) has the opportunity to oppose the motion and select a hearing. The expectation is that an appropriate hearing date will be selected and the debtor will cure the material default, or at least make substantial, tangible progress towards curing the material default, by the date of the hearing. It is unacceptable for a debtor (or their counsel) to select a hearing date, not show up at the hearing, and then, about two months later, assert that they are almost ready to cure the material default.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  
  The Seventh Circuit has stated that:
  1. he clients are principals, the attorney is an agent, and under the law of agency the principal is bound by his chosen agent’s deeds. The rule is that all of the attorney’s misconduct (except in the cases where the act is outside the scope of employment or in cases of excusable neglect) becomes the problem of the client. A lawyer who inexcusably neglects his client’s obligations does not present exceptional circumstances.
  Bakery Mach. & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc., 570 F.3d 845, 848 (7th Cir. 2009). "Although attorney carelessness can [in certain circumstances] constitute ‘excusable neglect’ under Rule 60(b)(1), attorney inattentiveness to litigation is not excusable, no matter what the resulting consequences the attorney’s somnolent behavior may have on a litigant." Easley v. Kirmsee, 382 F.3d 693, 698 (7th Cir. 2004) (collecting cases).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:13-21894
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion to Vacate Order Dismissing Chapter 13 Case EH
  Docket 150
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On July 10, 2013, Francisco & Maria Medina ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On August 30, 2013, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On January 10, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for delinquency. On January 23, 2018, Debtors filed their opposition and a request for hearing. On February 8, 2018, after a hearing, the case was dismissed.
  
  On February 22, 2018, Debtors filed a motion to vacate dismissal. The factual basis of Debtors’ motion is that Debtors had sent in a payment to cure the arrears on February 1, 2018, but, one week later, the payment had not yet posted. On February 23, 2018, Trustee filed its comments indicating approval of the motion conditioned on the full cure of the outstanding delinquency.
  
  DISCUSSION
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  
  Chapter 13
  Debtors rely on FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, which allows for relief from an order based on "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." Here, it appears that Debtors attempted to cure the outstanding delinquency by the date of the hearing and had, in fact, sent in a payment to cure the delinquency one week prior to the hearing. Because it appears that the dismissal of the case was due to the inadvertence of the Debtors, because Debtors have a meritorious defense and acted promptly to rectify the problem, and because no opposition has been filed to the instant motion, the Court is inclined to grant the motion and vacate dismissal of the case.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion conditioned on compliance with the Trustee’s comments.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Movant(s):
  Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  Tamar Terzian Tamar Terzian
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-11566
  
  Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Motion to Disallow Claims Number 3 filed by Mechanics Bank fka CRB Auto EH
  Docket 38
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/2018
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On March 1, 2017, Jose Gonzalez ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On April 12, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On April 12, 2017, Mechanics Bank FKA CRB Auto ("Creditor") filed a secured claim in the amount of $8,667.13 ("Claim 3"). On February 9, 2018, Debtor filed an objection to Claim 3.
  
  According to Debtor, on August 29, 2017, ostensibly while purchasing a new car, Debtor made a payment of $12,430.81 to Moss Bros Honda for a pay-off of the debt underlying Claim 3. Debtor now requests that Claim 3 be disallowed, and that Creditor be ordered to pay any funds received which exceed the amount of the payment to Creditor provided for in the Chapter 13 plan.
  
  .APPLICABLE LAW:
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  
  First, the Court notes that pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001(1), a proceeding to
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  recover money or property requires an adversary proceeding. See also FED. R. BANKR.
  P. Rule 3007(b). While the requirement of an adversary proceeding may be waivable in certain circumstances, here Creditor has not responded to the claim objection and the objection was mailed to a PO Box. In such circumstances, the Court cannot deem Creditor to have waived the requirement of an adversary proceeding. Therefore, Debtor’s request for an order directing Creditor to return funds will be denied.
  
  Second, the Court notes that the recipient of Debtor’s post-petition payment (Moss Bros. Honda) is not Creditor, but a third party whose relationship with Creditor is unclear from the record, and there is no evidence that Creditor received the alleged payoff.
  
  Ultimately, if Debtor made a significant payment to a pre-petition creditor outside the Chapter 13 plan, the claim objection process is not the proper mechanism for redressing such an error.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose A. Gonzales Jr. Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  Jose A. Gonzales Jr. Represented By Michael E Clark Michael E Clark Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz Barry E Borowitz Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-16024
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 9 by Claimant Theatlas Reagor Jr.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/2018
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On July 19, 2017, Stacy Reagor ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 7, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  On October 23, 2017, Debtor amended Schedule F to add a disputed debt of unknown amount owing to Theatlas Reagor ("Creditor") for child support overpayment and reimbursement for payment of medical services provided to the children of Debtor and Creditor. On January 21, 2018, Creditor filed a priority claim in the amount of
  $6,232.81 ("Claim 9").
  
  On February 7, 2018, Debtor filed an objection to Claim 9. Debtor argues that Claim 9 was late filed and is insufficiently documented. On March 7, 2018, Creditor filed his opposition. Creditor asserts the claim was filed late because he was not timely informed of the pendency of the bankruptcy case. Creditor’s response to Debtor’s argument that the documentation is inadequate is less than clear. Creditor appears to assert that the medical documentation is confusing, and that he will amend the claim
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  Chapter 13
  to provide additional documentation.
  
  The Court also notes that two days prior to this hearing, the Court held a hearing on Creditor’s motion for relief from the automatic stay.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  Chapter 13
  (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  
  Debtor argues that Creditor’s claim must be disallowed because it is untimely. Here, the deadline for filing claims was November 29, 2017, and Creditor’s claim was filed on January 21, 2018.
  
  "[T]he Ninth Circuit has repeatedly held that the deadline to file a proof of claim in a Chapter 13 proceeding is ‘rigid,’ and the bankruptcy court lacks equitable power to extent this deadline after the fact." In re Barker, 839 F.3d 1189, 1197 (9th Cir. 2016). "By virtue of Rule 9006(b)(3), a bankruptcy court does not have discretion to enlarge the time periods fixed by Rule 3002(c) nor permit an untimely claim when none of Rule 3002(c)’s five exceptions is applicable." In re Hayes, 327 B.R. 453, 458 (Bankr.
  C.D. Cal. 2005) (footnote omitted); see also In re Edelman, 237 B.R. 146, 152 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1999). Here, none of Rule 3002(c)’s exceptions apply.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 9.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Stacy N Reagor Represented By
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  M Wayne Tucker
  
  Chapter 13
  Stacy N Reagor Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-17261
  
  Eduardo Betancourt Reyes and Beatriz Betancourt
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Eduardo Betancourt Reyes Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Beatriz Betancourt Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-18792
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Chase Bank, serviced by SPS/Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc
  
  Also #8 EH
  Docket 42
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/2018
  
  As a preliminary manner, the Court notes that this is Debtor’s second motion to avoid the subject lien in the instant case. The previous motion was denied for a litany of notice, service, and technical issues.
  
  Regarding the instant motion, the Court notes the fair market value of the property exceeds the amount of the first lien. Therefore, the second lien (if any, see below) is not wholly unsecured and Debtor cannot avoid the lien using § 506(d).
  
  Nevertheless, the Court also notes that the evidence provided by Debtor indicates that the debt underlying the second lien was discharged and the mortgage lien was released by the lienholder several months ago. Counsel to explain why this motion was filed.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Patricia Mireles to personally appear.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Movant(s):
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Patricia A Mireles Patricia A Mireles Patricia A Mireles
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-18792
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/30/17, 12/21/17, 1/25/18, 3/1/18
  Also #7 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19765
  
  Danny Josefy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  EH
  
  Docket 22
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Danny Josefy Represented By Kevin Tang
  Movant(s):
  Danny Josefy Represented By Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19853
  
  Diego Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Diego Lopez Represented By
  Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-19892
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 1/4/18, 2/22/18, 3/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  03/08/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  VW objects to Debtor’s plan because it proposes a 1.5% interest rate (which is the contract rate). VW asserts that under Till it should receive 7.25% (representing prime of 4.25 plus a 3% increase for the additional risk factor).
  
  In Till v. SCS Credit Corp., the Supreme Court held that the formula approach, requiring adjustment of prime national interest rate based on risk of nonpayment, was the appropriate method for determining adequate rate of interest on a crammed down loan. 541 U.S. 465 (2004).
  
  The approach begins by looking to the national prime rate. Id. at 478-479. The approach then requires a bankruptcy court to adjust the prime rate according to the bankrupt debtors’ risk of nonpayment. Id. The appropriate size of that risk adjustment depends on such factors as (1) the circumstances of the estate, (2) the nature of the security, and (3) the duration and feasibility of the reorganization plan. Additionally, the court must hold a hearing at which the debtor and any creditors may present evidence about the appropriate risk adjustment. Finally, the Court indicated that creditors should bear the evidentiary burden as to risk.
  
  Here, VW’s claim on the Petition Date was $17,876.35 (per VW’s proof of claim). The Plan proposes to cramdown VW’s claim, paying VW in full only on the secured portion of its claim. Thus, under Till, VW as the holder of a crammed down loan is entitled to an adjusted interest rate.
  In Till, the Supreme Court indicated that a court choosing a cramdown interest
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  rate need not consider the creditor's individual circumstances, such as its prebankruptcy dealings with the debtor or the alternative loans it could make if permitted to foreclose. Id. Rather, the court should aim to treat similarly situated creditors similarly, and to ensure that an objective economic analysis would suggest the debtor's interest payments will adequately compensate all such creditors for the time value of their money and the risk of default. Id. Thus, here, the Debtor is incorrect that simply because she has proposed a 100% plan and has a pre-bankruptcy contract rate of 1.5%, VW should simply accept that pre-bankruptcy rate. Such rate simply does not recognize the reality acknowledged by the Supreme Court that "on the one hand, the fact of the bankruptcy establishes that the debtor is overextended and thus poses a significant risk of default and on the other hand, the postbankruptcy obligor is no longer the individual debtor but the court-supervised estate, and the risk of default is thus somewhat reduced."
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that under Till, the interest rate can and should be adjusted to account for the different risk profile presented by the Debtor now as opposed to when the Debtor obtained the contract rate. At a minimum, VW’s Objection should be SUSTAINED such that it should receive at least the 4.25% prime interest rate. Given the risk of default of a borrower in bankruptcy, the Court would be inclined to add an additional percentage point to the prime rate, for a total interest rate of 5.25% for VW.
  
  2/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 29, 2017, Lena Wade ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition and plan. On December 28, 2017, Debtor filed an amended plan. On January 11, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to confirmation. Among the grounds listed in Trustee’s objection was that confirmation should contain a condition that prohibited
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  Debtor from modifying the plan to pay less than 100% to unsecured creditors unless Debtor paid all disposable income into the plan. On January 25, 2018, Debtor filed her opposition to Trustee’s objection. On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a reply brief.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Trustee requests that this Court adopt the holding of In re McCarthy, 554 B.R. 388 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2016). The Court declines to do so for the reasons that follow.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) enumerates plan confirmation requirements. If the confirmation requirements are satisfied then "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), the court shall confirm [the] plan." Id. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) states:
  
  (b)(1) If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan ---
  1. the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or
  2. the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan.
  Subject to the discussion below, for the sake of analysis, the Court will assume § 1325(b)(1) is applicable here. Trustee argues in section II.D of its brief that once
  § 1325(b)(1) is invoked, confirmation is discretionary:
  
  However, the language in § 1325(b) is permissive and, therefore, more
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  discretionary – "the court MAY not confirm unless . . ." Therefore, debtor’s argument that the court MUST confirm the plan because it meets the
  
  Chapter 13
  requirements of § 1325 is not supported by the language of the statute. In fact, the Chapter 13 Trustee would argue that it is the discretionary language of
  § 1325(b)(1) that allows the court, under its equitable powers, to order a conditional confirmation as the court did in McCarthy.
  
  [Dkt. No. 24, pg. 10, lines 1-8] (parenthesis omitted) (italicization added for emphasis). Trustee’s assertion that the language of § 1325(b) is permissive and discretionary, however, is statutorily incorrect. 11 U.S.C. § 102(4) states: "’may not’ is prohibitive, and not permissive." As a result, the foundation of Trustee’s position appears to rest on a misreading of the statute.
  
  Instead, the Code provides for the following analysis at plan confirmation: (1) if the debtor has satisfied the § 1325(a) confirmation requirements and no objection is received, then the Court must confirm the plan; (2) if an objection is received and the debtor has not satisfied § 1325(b)(1), the Court cannot confirm the plan; and (3) if an objection is received and the debtor has satisfied § 1325(a)-(b)(1), then the Court must confirm the plan. See, e.g., 8 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1325.11[e] (16th ed. 2016) ("If an objection to confirmation is filed under section 1325(b)(1), the objection must be denied when ‘the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim.’ . . . [I]f the plan provides that the claims are to be paid in full, the trustee cannot demand that the debtors devote all of their projected disposable income each month to payment of claims in order to pay them more quickly.").
  
  Even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination by the Court, the nature of the objection filed by Trustee is inadequate to invoke the § 1325(b)(1) requirements. See, e.g., In re Torres, 193 B.R. 319, 322-23 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1996) ("in order for that subsection [§1325(b)(1)(B)] to become applicable to confirmation, an objection to confirmation must be made alleging that a debtor is not devoting all disposable income to the plan for a minimum period of three years."). As a result, even if § 1325(b)(1) provided for a discretionary determination, the standard would be irrelevant in this case.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Lena Dolores Wade
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Apart from the statutory interpretations problems with the Trustee’s argument, the Court finds that policy and equitable considerations weigh against Trustee’s position. The Court notes that the disposable income requirement is disjunctive: either the debtor must pledge all disposable income to the plan or the debtor must pay unsecured creditors in full. The Trustee does not dispute that Debtor has satisfied the disjunctive test.
  
  Ultimately, the Trustee relies upon the Court’s § 105 equitable powers in support of the request at issue. Rarely will it be the case, however, that the equities will in favor of creating a fixed rule binding for years regardless of changes in circumstances. The review of a proposed plan modification is generally a highly equitable endeavor that emphasizes the totality of the circumstances. Replacing that equitable analysis with a rigid rule not provided for by the Code is simply inequitable.
  
  The Court does agree, however, that a plan term requiring Debtors in a 100% plan to have to account for excess disposable income, in the even they later file a motion to modify, is of benefit.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20029
  
  Simon E. Williams
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #12.00 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 79039 Lake Club Dr, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92203; Decl of Simon E Williams
  
  MOVANT: SIMON E WILLIAMS
  
  From: 12/19/17, 12/21/17 EH
  Docket 4
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  12/19/2017
  
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. First, notice to the law firm that represented the secured creditor (the primary party at whom the motion is directed) does not include the handling lawyers’ names. As such notice is problematic as it will be delayed getting into the proper hands. Second, the prior case was not dismissed because of an ordinary payment default, as the motion implies, but because of failure to turn over tax refunds. Third, Debtor does not need the stay to seek a loan modification. Last, any equity in the Debtor’s residence will be recovered, on sale by the Trustee (not the Debtor) for the benefit of the estate, and the Trustee has not joined this request. Thus, Debtor has failed to rebut the presumption of lack of good faith as to U.S. Bank pursuant to § 362(c)(3)(C)(ii).
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Simon E. Williams Represented By Jenny L Doling
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Simon E. Williams
  
  Summer M Shaw
  
  Chapter 7
  Simon E. Williams Represented By Jenny L Doling Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander
  12:30 PM
  6:17-20388
  
  Oracio Rosales Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 2/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Oracio Rosales Hernandez Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10106
  
  Jules A Nelson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jules A Nelson Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10111
  
  Wanny Chansy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Wanny Chansy Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10112
  
  Eddie Garcia and Martha Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Eddie Garcia Represented By
  Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Martha Garcia Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10114
  
  Jose Peralta Velasquez, Jr
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Peralta Velasquez Jr Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10127
  
  David H Yopp
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David H Yopp Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10136
  
  Samuel Garcia and Claudia Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Samuel Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Claudia Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10151
  
  Eduardo Galvan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 1/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eduardo Galvan Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10160
  
  Eri A. Doulos
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Eri A. Doulos Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10196
  
  Kalake Monisoni Toutai
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Kalake Monisoni Toutai Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10240
  
  Guillermo Zamudio
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Guillermo Zamudio Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10248
  
  Vaughn Stevens
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vaughn Stevens Represented By Amanda G Billyard
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10261
  
  Nereeka Tamar Haynes
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Nereeka Tamar Haynes Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10285
  
  Alvin Leo Eckert, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alvin Leo Eckert Jr. Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10303
  
  Timothy G Klepeis
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Timothy G Klepeis Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10308
  
  Misti Gory
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Misti Gory Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10328
  
  Amanda Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Amanda Martinez Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10338
  
  Herman Owen Samuels
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Herman Owen Samuels Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10357
  
  Isaias Solano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Isaias Solano Represented By
  Edward T Weber
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10407
  
  Caesar A Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/14/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Caesar A Rodriguez Represented By Allan O Cate
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10414
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lucila Pineda Represented By Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10416
  
  Jose Guadalupe Lopez and Margarita Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Guadalupe Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Margarita Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10425
  
  Rex Thomas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/16/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Rex Thomas Represented By
  Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10454
  
  Scott Lawrence and Anita D Lawrence
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Scott Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Anita D Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10456
  
  David Allen Rose, Jr. and Karen Sue Rose
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David Allen Rose Jr. Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Karen Sue Rose Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-14560
  
  David Sandoval and Mary Celine Sandoval
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #38.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 79
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David Sandoval Represented By
  Bryant C MacDonald
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Mary Celine Sandoval Represented By
  Bryant C MacDonald
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-22236
  
  Gustavo Brito
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #39.00 Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Make Plan Payments EH
  Docket 71
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/22/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On September 30, 2014, Gustavo Brito ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On November 20, 2014, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The mandatory Chapter 13 form plan contains a provision (Section V.H) which states: "The Debtor will pay timely all postconfirmation tax liabilities directly to the appropriate taxing authorities as they become due."
  
  Since confirmation the Trustee has filed three motions to dismiss, all of which were ultimately resolved. Additionally, the Chapter 13 plan has been modified once. On February 23, 2018, the California Department of Tax & Fee Administration ("CDTFA") filed a motion to dismiss or convert to Chapter 7 on the basis that Debtors had not paid their postconfirmation taxes. The Court notes that the motion was served on Debtors’ attorney, but was not served on Debtors.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  The Court will continue the matter for CDTFA to serve the motion on Debtors.
  12:31 PM
  CONT...
  
  Gustavo Brito
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Regarding the merits, the Court notes that 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c)(6) provides for dismissal or conversion for cause, which is defined to include "material default by the debtor with respect to a term of a confirmed plan." Here, the Court notes that Debtors’ confirmed plan provided that all postconfirmation tax liabilities were to be timely paid. CDTFA has provided evidence that Debtor has accrued $19,888.54 in post- petition tax liabilities which constitutes a material default satisfying § 1307(c)(6).
  Because Debtors do not appear to have meaningful unencumbered, unexempt assets, this Court would be inclined to dismiss the case rather than convert it to Chapter 7.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter to April 19, 2018 at 12:30 p.m. for proper service of the motion on Debtors.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gustavo Brito Represented By Freddie V Vega
  Movant(s):
  California Department of Tax and Represented By
  Suman Mathews
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-24213
  
  Rula Nino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 100
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rula Nino Represented By
  Devin Sawdayi
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-25360
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #41.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Make Plan Payments From: 2/8/18
  EH
  
  Docket 71
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/8/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On December, 2014, William & Kathie Meineke ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On February 9, 2015, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The mandatory Chapter 13 form plan contains a provision (Section V.H) which states: "The Debtor will pay timely all postconfirmation tax liabilities directly to the appropriate taxing authorities as they become due."
  
  Since confirmation the Trustee has filed five motions to dismiss, all of which were ultimately resolved. Additionally, the Chapter 13 plan has been modified twice. On January 10, 2018, the California Franchise Tax Board ("CFTB") filed a motion to dismiss or convert to Chapter 7 on the basis that Debtors had not paid their postconfirmation taxes. The Court notes that the motion was served on Debtors’ attorney, but was not served on Debtors.
  
  DISCUSSION
  12:31 PM
  CONT...
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  The Court will continue the matter for CFTB to serve the motion on Debtors.
  
  Regarding the merits, the Court notes that 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c)(6) provides for dismissal or conversion for cause, which is defined to include "material default by the debtor with respect to a term of a confirmed plan." Here, the Court notes that Debtors’ confirmed plan provided that all postconfirmation tax liabilities were to be timely paid. CFTB has provided evidence that Debtors’ have yet to satisfy their 2014, 2015 and 2016 tax liabilities which constitutes a material default satisfying § 1307(c)(6).
  Because Debtors do not appear to have meaningful unencumbered, unexempt assets, this Court would be inclined to dismiss the case rather than convert it to Chapter 7.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter to March 8, 2017 at 12:30 p.m. for proper service of the motion on Debtors.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kathie Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Movant(s):
  FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Represented By Suman Mathews
  12:31 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-14835
  
  Bennea Cynthia Travis
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #42.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 71
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Bennea Cynthia Travis Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-19152
  
  Carol Elizabeth Tenney
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #43.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 54
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 11/16/17
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Carol Elizabeth Tenney Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-21983
  
  Pablo Javier Solis, Jr. and Norma Alicia Solis
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #44.00 Trustee's Motion for Order Dismissing Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 102
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 3/5/18.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Pablo Javier Solis Jr. Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Norma Alicia Solis Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-10385
  
  Adolfo Gonzalez and Angelica Gonzalez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #45.00 Trustee's Motion to for Order Dismissing Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 55
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Adolfo Gonzalez Represented By Luis G Torres
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Angelica Gonzalez Represented By Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-11794
  
  ROBERT A HAGUE and DIANNE L HAGUE
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #46.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 96
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  ROBERT A HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
  Joint Debtor(s):
  DIANNE L HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-15678
  
  Nicholas Asamoa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #47.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 64
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Nicholas Asamoa Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-17031
  
  Anderson L Pepper
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #48.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 66
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-18248
  
  Juan Jose Franco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #49.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/8/18, 3/1/18
  EH
  
  Docket 76
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juan Jose Franco Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-21236
  
  Ronald A Waters and Trisha Waters
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #50.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 34
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 2/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ronald A Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Trisha Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-15427
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #51.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 51
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-18131
  
  Ramon Gabriel Alvarez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #52.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 36
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ramon Gabriel Alvarez Represented By Devin Sawdayi
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-18210
  
  Jorge Manuel Azmitia and Yoshiko Azmitia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 38
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-19154
  
  Ernesto Sanchez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #54.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 40
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/13/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ernesto Sanchez Represented By Jerry Rulsky
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-10604
  
  Juan Manuel Plascencia De La Torre
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #54.10 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 73
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juan Manuel Plascencia De La Torre Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:30 PM
  6:18-10414
  
  Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #55.00 Order to appear and show cause why Luis Torres should not be sanctioned for:
  (1) Scheduling a hearing inappropriately late; (2) Filing poor pleadings; and (3) Not appearing in court despite being ordered to do so
  
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Leonel Villa Represented By
  Luis G Torres
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lucila Pineda Represented By Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:13-21247
  
  Patricia Chaton
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/28/2018
  
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee, have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 3,360 Trustee Expenses: $ 772.23
  
  Accountant Fees: $ 1,587 Accountant Costs:$ 232.60
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Patricia Chaton Represented By
  Lorene L Mies - DISBARRED -
  Trustee(s):
  Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Patricia Chaton
  
  Lezzlie E Hornsby
  
  Chapter 7
  11:00 AM
  6:09-26155
  
  Marcin Rozpedski and Laura M Rozpedski
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Motion for Entry of Order Directing the Clerk of the Court to Enter the Debtor's Discharge Retroactively Dated to October 20, 2009
  
  EH
  
  Docket 23
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/28/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On July 17, 2009, Marcin & Laura Rozpedski ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On December 16, 2009, the case was closed without entry of discharge because Debtors did not file the required financial management court certificate.
  
  On January 23, 2018, the case was reopened upon Debtors’ motion. On February 22, 2018, Marcin Rozpedski ("Marcin") filed his certification about a financial management course, although the Court notes that no such certificate was filed for Laura Rozpedski. It would appear that Debtors have since separated.
  
  On March 9, 2018, Debtors filed a motion for entry of order directing the Clerk of Court to enter the Debtor’s discharge retroactively dated to October 20, 2009. Marcin asserts that he was not informed by his attorney of the requirements to complete a financial management course because his former attorney’s office burned down.
  
  As of the petition date, Debtor had an outstanding judgment owed to Ford Motor
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Marcin Rozpedski and Laura M Rozpedski
  
  Chapter 7
  Credit Co. LLC ("Creditor"). Approximately six months before the petition date, Creditor recorded an abstract of judgment in Riverside County, although Marcin asserts he did not own any real property in Riverside County at that time. Later, in September 2013, Marcin acquired real property in Riverside County. In December 2017, Creditor applied for an application for renewal of judgment.
  
  By the instant motion, Debtor requests: (1) the retroactive entry of Marcin’s discharge; (2) a declaration by the Court that Creditor’s renewal of judgment is void; and (3) a declaration that Creditor’s abstract of judgment is void as to post-petition acquired property.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  The Court will first summarily address Debtor’s third request. The Court notes that pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001(2), a proceeding to determine the validity, priority, or extent of a lien or other interest in property requires an adversary proceeding. While the requirement of an adversary proceeding may be waivable in certain circumstances, here Creditor has not responded to the instant motion. In such circumstances, the Court cannot deem Creditor to have waived the requirement of an adversary proceeding. Therefore, the Court will deny Debtor’s request for an order declaring the judgment lien of Creditor to be void.
  
  Marcin also requests that his discharge be entered retroactively pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 105. Marcin has not provided any case law supporting the Court’s exercise of equitable powers in this fashion. The Court’s own review of the case law identifies few cases where a Court has contemplated the retroactive entry of discharge. See, e.g., In re Recile, 496 F.2d 675, 680 (5th Cir. 1974) (nunc pro tunc discharge only appropriate when discharge not entered wholly because of clerical mistake); Matter of Pilar Cordova Antuna, 45 B.R. 271, 277 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1985) (same). Here, discharge was not entered in 2009 due to the error of Debtors, and, as a result, the standard is clearly not satisfied.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Marcin Rozpedski and Laura M Rozpedski
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Nevertheless, it is worth noting that the paucity of case law on the issue is likely a result of the fact that the date that discharge is entered would seem to be legally immaterial. Regardless of the entry date of the discharge, the discharge will operate to absolve a debtor from in personam liability on pre-petition debts. The situation becomes murkier, however, where a party has an abstract of judgment that has not attached to any real property (and the claim is therefore unsecured), the case is closed, real property is acquired by the judgment defendant (now the claim is secured), and then the case is reopened to seek entry of a discharge. In this narrow circumstance, it would appear that the date of the entry of discharge is potentially material.
  Nevertheless, in this circumstance, as noted above, Marcin has failed to establish grounds for the entry of discharge retroactive to more than eight years ago.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, only to the extent of issuing a discharge now (not retroactive) as to Marcin only.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marcin Rozpedski Represented By Gary Swanson Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Laura M Rozpedski Represented By Gary Swanson Summer M Shaw
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Marcin Rozpedski and Laura M Rozpedski
  
  Chapter 7
  Marcin Rozpedski Represented By Gary Swanson Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
  Trustee(s):
  Patricia J Zimmermann (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 CONT Second Joint Motion and Moving Memorandum by Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation for Order Approving Settlement between Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation
  
  From: 2/14/18 Also #4
  EH
  
  Docket 521
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Movant(s):
  Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 Order setting hearing on Opposition to Notice of Lodgment Also #3
  EH
  
  Docket 542
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  6:14-17350
  
  Dean L. Springer, Sr. and Tami Jo Springer
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 CONT Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order From: 8/30/17, 9/20/17, 11/1/17, 12/13/17, 2/7/18, 2/28/18
  EH
  
  Docket 148
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/9/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Dean L. Springer Sr. Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tami Jo Springer Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Hilder & Associates Represented By
  Lei Lei Wang Ekvall
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Richard A Marshack Sarah Cate Hays
  D Edward Hays Laila Masud
  11:00 AM
  6:16-17888
  
  Jay J. Goodman
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Order to Show Cause RE Civil Contempt and For an Order Holding Delia Moya in Civil Contempt
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/28/18
  PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
  
  On August 31, 2016, Jay Goodman ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On December 12, 2016, Debtor received a Chapter 7 discharge, and the next day the case was closed.
  
  On February 12, 2018, Debtor filed a motion for an order to show cause why Delia Moya ("Moya") should not be held in civil contempt. On February 27, 2018, the Court entered an order to show cause (the "OSC") and set a hearing on the matter. On March 14, 2018, Moya filed her response to the OSC, and, on March 21, 2018, Debtor filed a reply.
  
  SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
  
  Debtor argues that Moya has violated the discharge injunction. Debtor and Moya were formerly married. On April 22, 2015, during the court of their dissolution proceedings, it appears that the family law court entered an earnings assignment order
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Jay J. Goodman
  
  Chapter 7
  whereby Moya would receive 50% of Debtor’s social security benefits. On May 10, 2016, a modified earning assignment (the "EOA") order was filed. That same day Debtor and Moya entered into a marital settlement agreement (the "MSA"). The MSA contained a provision which stated, in relevant part, that: "Husband owes Wife certain monies with respect to spousal support arrears, court-ordered attorney fees, and court- ordered sanctions which, with interest, total approximately $69,000." The crux of Debtor’s argument appears to be that at least part of the amount identified is dischargeable in bankruptcy. The crux of Moya’s opposition is that the entire debt is nondischargeable either through the operation of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) or 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15).
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  After reviewing Debtor’s motion, Moya’s response, and Debtor’s reply, the Court is left with the firm impression that Debtor was unaware of the operation of 11 U.S.C.
  § 523(a)(15) when the instant motion was filed. 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(15) states:
  
  (a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –
  
  (15) to a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor and not of the kind described in paragraph (5) that is incurred by the debtor in the course of a divorce or separation or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record, or a determination made in accordance with the State or territorial law by a
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Jay J. Goodman
  governmental unit;
  
  Chapter 7
  
  While Debtor argues in his motion that part of the debt created by the MSA is not a domestic support obligation, §523(a)(15) eliminates the need to determine whether all components of the debt at issue are actually domestic support obligations. Until 2005, bankruptcy courts were required to apply a balancing test to determine whether a debt of the type listed in § 523(a)(15) was dischargeable; additionally, the debt was automatically discharged in the absence of an adversary proceeding. See generally COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 523.23 (16th ed. 2009) (briefly discussing history of § 523(a)(15)). As a result, Debtor’s motion contains many references to now obsolete case law which applied the incorrect standard. Moya has pointed out this statutory change in her opposition, and Debtor has not advanced a new legal argument in his reply. It is clear that the entirety of the debt owed to Moya, Debtor’s ex-spouse, as part of the Marital Settlement Agreement, constitutes a debt owed to a former spouse in connection with a separation agreement. Therefore, to the extent the debt is not non- dischargeable by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), it is certainly non-dischargeable by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15).
  
  To the extent that Debtor requests reformation or cancellation of the EAO or MSA, this request is beyond the Court’s jurisdiction. A debtor cannot request relief pursuant to non-bankruptcy law in a closed case. See 28 U.S.C. § 157 (identifying four categories of bankruptcy court jurisdiction).
  
  To the extent that Moya requests certain sanctions against Debtor for bringing the instant motion, the Court notes that Moya’s opposition is not the appropriate mechanism for bringing such a request. See FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(c)(1). The Court also notes that Local Rule 9020 specifies the procedure to be followed when a party requests an order to show cause. Local Rule 9020(b) provides that a responding party shall have seven days to file a written objection. Local Rule 9020(d)(1) provides that if a written objection is not filed, "the court may conclude that there is no objection to issuance of the order to show cause." Here, Moya was served with Debtor’s motion for contempt. And the Court waited fifteen days between entering the order to show cause, during which period Moya did not file any written objection.
  While it may be fair to characterize Debtor’s motion as not "warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law," the Court also notes that a timely response to the motion by Moya would have
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Jay J. Goodman
  
  Chapter 7
  triggered earlier Court review of the merits and significantly mitigated costs.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to VACATE the OSC.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jay J. Goodman Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Movant(s):
  Jay J. Goodman Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-17749
  
  Joshua Cord Richardson
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01035 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson
  
  #7.00 Status Conference re Notice of Removal RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01035.
  Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua C Richardson. Case No. RIC 1700456]; Attachments: # 1 Notice of Status Conference re Removal of Action Nature of Suit: 01 - Determination of removed claim or cause
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori
  Defendant(s):
  Joshua C Richardson Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By Laila Masud
  D Edward Hays
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  2:00 PM
  6:16-15419
  
  Francisco Javier Castillo
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01310 Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital v. Castillo
  
  #8.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01310. Complaint by Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital against Francisco Javier Castillo (willful and malicious injury)
  
  From: 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 11/8/17, 1/31/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco Javier Castillo Represented By Joseph M Tosti
  Defendant(s):
  Francisco Javier Castillo Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Represented By
  Lazaro E Fernandez
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-12858
  
  Scott Leigh Baumann
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01205 PRINGLE v. Rizzo et al
  
  #9.00 CONT Status Conference Re: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01205. Complaint by JOHN P PRINGLE against Michael R Rizzo, Linda M Rizzo. ($350.00 Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co- owner - 363(h)
  
  FROM: 11/29/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Scott Leigh Baumann Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Defendant(s):
  Michael R Rizzo Pro Se
  Linda M Rizzo Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Holly Lynn Baumann Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Plaintiff(s):
  JOHN P PRINGLE Represented By Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Scott Leigh Baumann
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
  2:00 PM
  6:14-12990
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01121 Smedman et al v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al
  
  #10.00 Motion For Summary Judgment EH
  Docket 16
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/28/2018
  PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
  
  On March 10, 2014, Craig Smedman & Veronica Wilkins (collectively, "Plaintiffs"; individually, "Smedman" and "Wilkins") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On August 12, 2014, Plaintiffs received a Chapter 7 discharge. On October 28, 2015, the State Board of Equalization filed a proof of claim in the amount of $155,734.68 ("Claim 13"), of which $127,905.25 was identified as a priority claim. On April 15, 2016, the case was closed.
  
  On May 25, 2017, the case was reopened. On June 23, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against SBE. The complaint contains two causes of action: (1) declaratory relief; and (2) a request for an injunction.
  
  Due to issues with the service of the complaint, SBE’s answer was not filed until December 18, 2017. On January 23, 2018, SBE moved for summary judgment. On March 7, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their opposition to SBE’s motion for summary judgment.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  ARGUMENTS
  
  Plaintiff’s complaint is somewhat confusing. Paragraph 9 of the complaint states: "An actual and genuine controversy exists as to whether Plaintiff’s/Debtors’ position that any claim against them by the Defendant is time barred or discharged, in that Plaintiffs claim that any such claim by Defendant is in fact time barred and discharged, and Defendant disputes such contention." Paragraph 10 of the complaint states, in pertinent part: "Plaintiffs seek an adjudication that any claim by Defendant is time barred, discharged, and that the automatic stay and discharge stay prevents any alleged collection efforts. Plaintiffs seek a specific ruling by his Court that any such claim by Defendant is discharged and can never been enforced."
  
  In its motion for summary judgment, the SBE argues that it is not the proper party in this lawsuit, but, rather the named defendant should have been the California Department of Taxes and Fees Administration ("CDTFA"). Furthermore, SBE argues that the complaint fails to allege a violation of the automatic stay or the discharge injunction. Regarding the automatic stay, SBE asserts that they did not take any actions while the automatic stay was in effect and, even if they had issued a notice of assessment while the automatic stay was operative, that notice is excepted from the automatic stay. Regarding the discharge injunction, SBE asserts that its claim is non- dischargeable.
  
  In Plaintiffs’ opposition, Plaintiffs argue that the SBE’s decision to answer the complaint should estop SBE from arguing that it is not the property defendant, and, alternatively, that Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the complaint.
  Furthermore, Plaintiffs identifies certain actions by SBE which it contends constitute a violation of the automatic stay. Plaintiffs also argue that: "Neither Defendant was a ‘responsible person’ to impose personal liability for sales taxes under Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6829."
  
  DISCUSSION
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  As a preliminary matter, Plaintiffs also characterize Claim 13 as being untimely, although it is not clear how the characterization relates to their causes of action. If a claim is filed late (or not at all), the holder of the claim simply waives their right to any disbursements made by the trustee. If such a claim is non-dischargeable, the claim would not be "time barred" by reason of its having been filed late (or not at all) in the bankruptcy case. In any event, the claim was not filed late. The Trustee’s notice of assets [Dkt. No. 21] identifies a government claims bar date of January 15, 2016.
  
  Plaintiffs and SBE appear to disagree about whether Claim 13 was discharged. 11
  U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(A) states:
  1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b) or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –
    1. for a tax or a custom duty –
      1. of the kind and for the periods specified in section 507(a)(3) or 507(a)(8) of this title, whether or not a claim for such tax was filed or allowed;
        
        11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(8)(A)(i) states:
        
        The following expenses and claims have priority in the following order:
  1. Eight, allowed unsecured claims of government units, only to the extent that such claims are for –
    1. a tax on or measured by income or gross receipts for a taxable year ending on or before the date of the filing of the petition –
      1. for which a return, if required, is last due, including extensions, after three years before the date of the filing of the petition;
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  
  SBE argues that its tax claims falls within § 507(a)(8)(A)(i).1 Presumably, Plaintiffs believe Claim 13 was not discharged, although that is not actually asserted in Plaintiffs’ opposition.
  
  SBE correctly points out that the Ninth Circuit has previously held that the type of tax assessed here (responsible person liability)2 is a "tax" for purposes of § 523(a)(1) and is measured on "gross receipts" for purposes of § 507(a)(8). See In re Ilko, 651 F.3d 1049, 1050 (9th Cir. 2011). Plaintiffs have not presented any legal argument to the contrary.
  
  Next the Court must evaluate whether the applicable tax returns were due "after three years before the date of the filing of the petition." 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(8)(A)(i). As evidenced by SBE’s proof of claim and the notice of determination attached to the instant motion, SBE originally asserted a priority claim for taxes due during the period October 1, 2010 to March 31, 2012.
  
  CAL. REV. & TAX. CODE § 6452(a) provides that:
  
  (a) On or before the last day of the month following each quarterly period of three months, a return for the preceding quarterly period shall be filed with the board in the form as prescribed by the board, which may include, but not be limited to, electronic media. Returns shall be authenticated in a form or pursuant to methods as may be prescribed by the board.
  
  Therefore, all of the priority part of Claim 13 fits within § 507(a)(8)(A)(i), with the exception of the tax due for the final quarter of 2010. SBE’s declaration, however, asserts that SBE made a legal adjustment to the liability of Plaintiffs to discharge the tax due during the final quarter of 2010. SBE, however, has demonstrated that the remainder of the priority portion of Claim 13 was non-dischargeable. Plaintiffs have
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  not advanced any legal argument to the contrary.
  
  Plaintiffs’ argument that they were not proper parties to be assessed "responsible person liability" under CAL. REV. & TAX. CODE § 6829 misses the operative issue. This argument does not go to whether the claim of SBE has been discharged, but, instead, goes to whether SBE has a claim at all. Regardless of whether the assertion of Plaintiffs is accurate, the claim as asserted by SBE fits within the non-dischargeability provision of § 507(a)(8)(A)(i). As a result, the claim cannot have been discharged, and there cannot have been a violation of the discharge injunction.
  
  Because this Court has concluded that the claim of SBE is not "unenforceable, time- barred, and otherwise discharged," it is inappropriate to issue an injunction to prevent SBE from seeking its legal remedies.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT summary judgment in favor of SBE. As to the assessed liability for the final quarter of 2010, SBE to discuss including language in the judgment as to those taxes having been discharged.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Garrick Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
  Defendant(s):
  STATE BOARD OF Pro Se
  California Department of Tax and Represented By
  Matthew C. Heyn
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Veronica Lee Wilkins Represented By Neil C Evans
  Movant(s):
  California Department of Tax and Represented By
  Matthew C. Heyn
  Plaintiff(s):
  Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
  Veronica Lee Wilkins Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:16-16362
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion to vacate dismissal order dated 10/12/16 for this case to allow an objection to the proof of claim filed with this court; request for injunction and TRO
  
  From: 2/22/18 Also #2
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling: 03/29/2018
  On February 22, 2018, the Court issued its tentative ruling and continued the hearing on the Debtor’s Motion to permit the Debtor to file a response to the Court’s tentative ruling.
  
  The Debtor filed her response on March 15, 2018 (the "Response").
  
  In her Response to the Court’s Tentative Ruling of February 22, 2018 (the "TR"), the Debtor responds that she seeks to vacate dismissal in order to "correct the record". The Debtor’s Response, however, does little more than assert an incomprehensible argument under Rule 60(b)(6) regarding the "Y2K Bug" and then goes on to again argue that fraud has occurred. The Response does not address the Rule 60(c) time limit on a Rule 60(b) motion based on fraud. Nor does the Response provide any evidence or argument to warrant vacating the dismissal under Rule 60(b) (6).
  
  Finally, the Debtor’s Response cites to alleged violations of federal criminal and/or civil laws by Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp. Here, even were the Court to conclude that the Debtor’s allegations are true and that Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp made misrepresentations or committed fraud, the bankruptcy case was dismissed for reasons independent of any issues related to Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  Thus, the alleged violations do not of themselves provide support for Debtor’s Motion to Vacate Dismissal. If the Debtor believes Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp may have criminal or civil liability then she is free to pursue actions against these entities in federal district court.
  
  Finally, on March 8, 2018, Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp filed their opposition to the Debtor’s Motion. Their Opposition reiterates the points raised by the Court’s TR that the Motion was not properly served and that relief is not warranted under Rule 9024. Given the service issues with the Motion, the Court has considered the opposition of Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp and is inclined to DENY the Motion for the reasons stated in today’s tentative ruling, in the February 22, 2018 TR, in the Opposition of Wells Fargo and Clear Recon Corp, and in the Trustee’s Comments.
  
  02/22/2018
  Background:
  On July 18, 2016, Conchita Ang ("Debtor") filed for chapter 13 relief. Rod Danielson is the duly appointed chapter 13 trustee ("Trustee").
  
  On October 12, 2016, the Court granted the Motion of the United States Trustee to dismiss the Debtor’s case with a re-filing bar, thereby dismissing the Debtor’s case (the "Dismissal Order")
  
  The Debtor subsequently appealed the dismissal of the case to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the "BAP"). On August 10, 2017, the BAP affirmed the order of this Court dismissing the Debtor’s case as a bad faith filing.
  
  On February 1, 2018, the Debtor filed a Motion to Vacate the Dismissal Order (the "Motion"). On February 5, 2018, the Trustee filed comments recommending that the Court deny the Debtor’s Motion.
  
  Applicable Law: FRBP 9024, FRCP 60(b)
  
  Discussion:
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  Under FRBP 9024 (incorporating FRCP 60(b)), a court may relieve a party
  
  Chapter 13
  from judgment for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) fraud or other misconduct; (4) a void judgment; (5) a satisfied or discharged judgment; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from operation of judgment. FRBP 9024.
  
  The Debtor does not specify under which subsection of Rule 60(b) she is moving. However, the allegations in the Motion appear to indicate that the Debtor believes fraud has occurred as to "alleged creditors" Wells Fargo Bank and Clear Recon Corp. Fraud falls within Rule 60(b)(3). Potentially, the Debtor is also alleging that relief is justified based on new evidence discovered during the appeal process which would fall under Rule 60(b)(2). (Motion at ¶5).
  
  As a threshold matter, pursuant to Rule 60(c), a motion under Rule 60(b) that is brought for reasons (1), (2), or (3) cannot be brought more than a year after the entry of the order. FRCP 60(c). Here, more than one year has elapsed since the Dismissal Order was entered on October 12, 2016. Therefore, based on the allegations in the Motion, 60(b)(6) appears to be the only grounds upon which the Dismissal Order could be set aside.
  
  The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 60(b)(6) should be used sparingly as an equitable remedy to prevent manifest injustice and is to be utilized only where extraordinary circumstances prevented a party from taking timely action to prevent or correct an erroneous judgment. In re International Fibercom, Inc., 503 F.3d 933, 941 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted). Accordingly, a party who moves for such relief "must demonstrate both injury and circumstances beyond his control that prevented him from proceeding with ... the action in a proper fashion. Id.
  
  Here, the Debtor has failed to either (1) demonstrate manifest injustice, or (2) to demonstrate what extraordinary circumstances prevented her from bringing this Motion at an earlier junction. Instead, the timing of the instant Motion appears more likely to reflect the Debtor’s refusal to accept the ruling of the BAP which affirmed this Court’s Dismissal Order. Further, as pointed out by the Trustee, the Debtor’s Motion fails to address the numerous grounds for dismissal delineated in the Court’s Dismissal Order, including the lack of disposable income to fund a chapter 13 plan and the Debtor’s history of skeletal filings. Finally, the Debtor believes she should
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  have an opportunity to object to proofs of claim filed in her dismissed case. However, there is no explanation or averment as to how a proof of claim filed in a dismissed case has caused or is causing injury to the Debtor.
  
  In sum, while the Debtor believes she has meritorious grounds for alleging fraud against the "alleged creditors", the Motion fails to demonstrate that the bankruptcy court is the appropriate forum for the Debtor to litigate these disputes with the creditors given that the Debtor’s case has been dismissed and that no evidence has been provided to warrant reinstating the bankruptcy case.
  
  Separately, the Motion appears to seek the issuance of a temporary restraining order. However, LBR 7065 clearly states that a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction may only be sought as a provision remedy in an adversary proceeding.
  
  In addition to the foregoing, the Court also denies the Motion on the basis of improper service because the Debtor has failed to serve the Motion in accordance with FRBP 7004 as to the alleged creditors.
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Based on the foregoing, the Motion is DENIED in its entirety.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  12:30 PM
  6:16-16362
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion and Notice to remove Trustee Rod Danielson Also #1
  EH
  
  Docket 56
  
  Tentative Ruling: 03/29/2018 BACKGROUND
  The Debtor moves the Court for an order removing Rod Danielson as the trustee for her case stemming from an alleged "failure to perform his duties pursuant to … Section 704(a)(5)" by an alleged failure to object to the allowance of an "improper claim", also for "malfeasance of office for gross negligence and willful misconduct."
  
  DISCUSSION
  Once appointed, only the bankruptcy court, after notice and hearing, can remove the trustee. 11 U.S.C. § 324; In re Reed, 178 B.R. 817 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 1995) (citing Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard ), 31 F.3d 842, 844 (9th Cir.1994)). Section 324 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a trustee may be removed "for cause." However, the requisite cause for removal of a trustee, as required by § 324, has not been defined in the Bankruptcy Code; rather it must be determined by the courts on a case by case basis. Id. (citing In re Lundborg, 110 B.R. 106, 108 (Bankr.D.Conn.1990); In re Haugen Construction Service, Inc., 104 B.R. 233, 240 (Bankr.D.N.D.1989). The requisite cause has been defined as, " ‘reasons for which the law and sound public policy recognize as sufficient [to] warrant ... removal’ and reasons which ‘relate to and affect the administration of the office [of the trustee] and [which] must be restricted [sic] to something of a substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public.’ " Baker v. Seeber (In re Baker ), 38 B.R. 705, 707 (D.Md.1983) (affirming and quoting Judge Evans, below). Most case law
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  concerning the removal of a trustee involves intentional misconduct or negligence on the part of the trustee in the administration of the estate. Id. Such cause has been interpreted to include when the trustee is not disinterested, where the trustee fails to perform his or her duties or unreasonably delays in the performance of those duties. Lundborg, 110 B.R. at 108 (citations omitted). But, a trustee is not responsible, and therefore should not be removed, for mistakes in judgment where the judgment is both reasonable and discretionary. Reed (citing Mosser v. Darrow, 341 U.S. 267, 272, 71
  S.Ct. 680, 682–83, 95 L.Ed. 927 (1951); Lundborg, 110 B.R. at 108).
  
  A Chapter 7 trustee's duties encompass investigating, liquidating, handling and distributing assets of the Chapter 7 estate. See § 704. While a Chapter 13 trustee performs some of the same or similar investigative and fiduciary functions of a Chapter 7 trustee, the work of the Chapter 13 trustee is focused primarily on administration of the Chapter 13 debtor's plan, a very different job. See § 1302. In re Colburn, 231 B.R. 778, 783 (Bankr. D. Or. 1999).
  
  The Debtor’s case was dismissed for various reasons, including the lack of disposable income to fund a chapter 13 plan and the Debtor’s history of skeletal filings (in addition to the fact that, as referenced by the Trustee, the Debtor was not eligible to be a chapter 13 debtor because she had exceeded the debt limits for chapter 13). Here, there was no plan to administer and the Debtor’s case was improperly filed as a chapter 13. Moreover, as indicated by the Trustee, even assuming, arguendo, that the Trustee had any reason to object to the claim that the Debtor disputes, such claim had not been filed at the time of the creditor meeting and due to the dismissal of the case no purpose would have been served by the Trustee’s objection to the claim post- dismissal.
  
  The Debtor’s request for removal of the Trustee is nothing more than a frivolous attack on the Trustee which serves no purpose. The Debtor has failed to identify any "cause" for removal under § 324. Specifically, the Debtor’s motion is unsupported by any facts or evidence to support her allegations that the Trustee acted improperly in declining to object to the proof of claim of Wells Fargo/Clear Recon Corp. Instead, the declaration of the Debtor simply states in conclusory fashion that she believes the Trustee had a duty to "demand and examine the Proof of Claim" and to do so "timely". Instead, the Court finds that given the myriad issues with the Debtor’s case, the Trustee’s judgment that examination of the proof of claim was not
  12:30 PM
  CONT... Conchita C Ang
  
  Chapter 13
  necessary was both reasonable and within the Trustee’s discretion.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Conchita C Ang Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-11131
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 6 by Claimant Internal Revenue Service EH
  Docket 41
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  03/29/2018
  
  Background:
  
  On February 14, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Bruce and Ann Ruggles (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. Rod Danielson is the duly appointed trustee ("Trustee"). On March 2, 2018, the Debtors filed objection to Claim No. 6 (the "Objection") filed by the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS").
  
  On March 15, 2018, IRS filed its opposition and response to the Objection ("Opposition").
  
  Applicable Law:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
  Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
  Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  Analysis:
  
  The Debtors objection is that:
  1. The unsecured priority claim of $7,999.80 was an estimated claim when filed; and
  2. The Debtors filed their actual return on April 2, 2017, and the liability based on their return is a reduced amount of $1,498.
  3. The Trustee has paid $1,098.68 on the IRS’s claim, leaving an unpaid balance of $407.32.
  On March 8, 2018, the IRS filed an amended proof of claim reducing the amount of its unsecured priority claim to $407.32.
  
  Tentative Ruling
  Based on the foregoing, the amendment to the IRS proof of claim resolves the dispute.
  12:30 PM
  CONT...
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  The Motion shall be DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:17-17086
  
  Bryan Dale Reid and Cristi Mishael Reid
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  EH
  
  Docket 25
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bryan Dale Reid Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Cristi Mishael Reid Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Bryan Dale Reid Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Cristi Mishael Reid Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10357
  
  Isaias Solano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Isaias Solano Represented By
  Edward T Weber
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10416
  
  Jose Guadalupe Lopez and Margarita Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Guadalupe Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Margarita Lopez Represented By David Lozano
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10478
  
  Litza Maribel Warner
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Litza Maribel Warner Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10496
  
  Luis Fuentes Moreno
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Luis Fuentes Moreno Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10498
  
  Stephen Francis Wallin and Kathleen Lillian Wallin
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Stephen Francis Wallin Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kathleen Lillian Wallin Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:30 PM
  6:18-10534
  
  Eugene Emery Wood
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/12/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eugene Emery Wood Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:13-30641
  
  Jacob J Cannon and Danielle M Cannon
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/1/18
  EH
  
  Docket 113
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jacob J Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Danielle M Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:14-11369
  
  Robert Wayne Cook, Sr. and Kelly Danielle Cook
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 135
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Robert Wayne Cook Sr. Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelly Danielle Cook Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-19735
  
  Mario C Binuya and Linda Binuya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 60
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mario C Binuya Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Linda Binuya Represented By
  Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:15-20628
  
  Robert R. Gentile
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 59
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Robert R. Gentile Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-11872
  
  Garan Bales
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Proceeding (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 116
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/28/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Garan Bales Represented By
  Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:16-18526
  
  Ana M. Oliver
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 50
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ana M. Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-13360
  
  Biani Berlenda Mora
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 46
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Biani Berlenda Mora Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-13809
  
  Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-15427
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18
  EH
  
  Docket 51
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:31 PM
  6:17-16751
  
  Gary Ramirez and Christina Faith Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 28
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gary Ramirez Represented By
  Ethan Kiwhan Chin
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Christina Faith Ramirez Represented By
  Ethan Kiwhan Chin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:12-27192
  
  Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28114 Championship Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92555
  
  MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18, 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 100
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/5/18 AT 10:00 AM.
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/28/2017
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Debtors have provided evidence that regular payments were made between May 2016 and November 1, 2017 (with the exception of the August 2016 and December 2016 payments for which Debtors are seeking evidence). Exhibit 5, which is the Movant’s summary of post-petition payments reflects numerous debits for 2016 payments which appears to corroborate Debtors’ assertion that refunds were made due to a mix-up in payments being made by the Trustee’s office.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Achilles A. LaSalle Jr. Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elsie LaSalle Represented By
  Lazaro E Fernandez
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
  
  Chapter 13
  HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic Debbie Hernandez Rosemary Allen
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  10:00 AM
  6:14-12516
  
  John Alexander Jay
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1 Avenida Las Palmas, Rancho Mirage, California 92270
  
  MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB
  
  EH
  
  Docket 191
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John Alexander Jay Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Movant(s):
  Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
  Megan E Lees Alexander K Lee Armin M Kolenovic
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  John Alexander Jay
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:14-16730
  
  Juanita M Kawakami
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 25056 Camino Del Norte, Barstow, CA 92311
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 70
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions, if any.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Juanita M Kawakami Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for Represented By
  Christina J O
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-13752
  
  Catalina Smith
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 16227 Miller Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336.
  
  MOVANT: US ROF II/BANK NATIONAL ASSOC
  
  From: 1/23/18, 2/27/18 EH
  Docket 44
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/12/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  Movant to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Catalina Smith Represented By Luis G Torres
  Movant(s):
  U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
  Megan E Lees
  U.S. ROF II Legal Title Trust 2015- Represented By
  Megan E Lees Alexander K Lee Jamie D Hanawalt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Catalina Smith
  
  Armin M Kolenovic Kelsey X Luu
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-13007
  
  Ruby Lee Frazier
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1928 Sycamore Hill Drive, Riverside, CA 92506
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A.
  
  CASE DISMISSED 3/12/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ruby Lee Frazier Represented By Michael R Totaro
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for Represented By
  Kristin A Zilberstein Merdaud Jafarnia Christina J O
  Can Guner Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14287
  
  Brent Duane Larson and Sarah Marnet Larson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32504 Bergamo Court, Temecula, California 92592
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 2/13/18 EH
  Docket 67
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay and GRANT request for relief under ¶3.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Brent Duane Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sarah Marnet Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Movant(s):
  U.S. BANK, NATIONAL Represented By April Harriott
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Brent Duane Larson and Sarah Marnet Larson
  Shreena Augustin Seth Greenhill Keith Labell Sean C Ferry
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14476
  
  Juan Rene Fullen, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: N 2008 Warrior Warrior FB1900, Vin No. 5HRFF19208C024569
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 56
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Juan Rene Fullen Jr. Represented By Luis G Torres
  Movant(s):
  Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Megan E Lees
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Juan Rene Fullen, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-16909
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT P/U 4D 5 3/4
  
  MOVANT: BALBOA THRIFT & LOAN
  
  From: 2/27/18 EH
  Docket 140
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/27/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears and adequate protection discussions, if any.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Movant(s):
  Balboa Thrift & Loan Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  Keith E Herron
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-18818
  
  Henrico Guillermo Vidales and Guillermina Vidales
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2009 Toyota Rav4, VIN: JTMZF33V49D006369
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 39
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Henrico Guillermo Vidales Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Guillermina Vidales Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Henrico Guillermo Vidales and Guillermina Vidales
  
  Chapter 7
  Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Jennifer H Wang
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11131
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 935 Goldenrod St., Corona, CA 92882
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  From: 1/9/18, 2/27/18 EH
  Docket 31
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/29/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  1/9/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Limited
  
  Parties to provide status of adequate protection discussions, and Debtors to explain why evidence that they are current was not attached to motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Brandye N Foreman John Tamburo
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-11658
  
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 2/6/18, 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 31
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  2/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
  § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it is unclear if effective service was made upon "borrower" Anthony Elie. Furthermore, because Anthony Elie is not a party to the note he is not a co-debtor within the meaning of the statute.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-13608
  
  Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8893 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 2/13/18, 3/6/18 EH
  
  Docket 23
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/8/18 AT 10:00 AM.
  Tentative Ruling:
  02/13/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Subject to discussions re adequate protection, the Court’s tentative is to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay, GRANT authority to offer loan workout options pursuant to ¶3 of prayer for relief and GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Warren Alan Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelly Suzanne Hall Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
  Lionel E Giron
  
  Chapter 13
  U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15822
  
  Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 BMW 3 Series Sedan 4D 328I
  
  MOVANT: FINANCIAL SERVICES VEHICLE TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 83
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alfredo Loera Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Veronica O Loera Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Financial Services Vehicle Trust Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Alfredo Loera and Veronica O Loera
  
  Bret D. Allen
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-16563
  
  Julian Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 24630 Singer Street, Moreno Valley, CA 92557
  
  MOVANT: BANC OF CALIFORNIA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, DBA BANC HOME LOANS
  
  EH
  
  Docket 24
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY request under ¶ 14 because there does not appear to be an attached continuation page.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Julian Hernandez Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  Banc of California, National Represented By Daniel K Fujimoto
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Julian Hernandez
  
  Caren J Castle
  
  Chapter 7
  Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17420
  
  Jeffrey Elkins
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 788 Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
  
  MOVANT: US NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 49
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request for relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)
  (3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jeffrey Elkins Represented By Anthony P Cara
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil Angela M Fowler
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Jeffrey Elkins
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18316
  
  Julio C. Davila
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17937 Aloe Lane, Riverside, CA 92503
  
  MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 71
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/28/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Julio C. Davila Represented By Michael Jay Berger
  Movant(s):
  PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, Represented By
  Robert P Zahradka
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19337
  
  Sandra Lorena Parra
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 44670 San Clemente Cir, Palm Desert, California 92260-3526
  
  MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY
  
  EH
  
  Docket 26
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request for relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)
  (3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sandra Lorena Parra Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Movant(s):
  Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Sandra Lorena Parra
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19785
  
  Evonne Marie Woodard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40454 Ariel Hope Way, Murrieta, CA 92563
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 25
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Evonne Marie Woodard Represented By Dana Travis
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20110
  
  Tammie Turner
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Hyundai Elantra, VIN: KMHDH4AE7DU549135
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tammie Turner Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
  Jennifer H Wang
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Tammie Turner
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10074
  
  Charlie W Parker
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3600 Duffy St., San Bernardino, CA 92407
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 17
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (4) based on authorized transfers of a fractionalized interest in the property and multiple recent bankruptcy cases affecting the property. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay as moot because there appears to be no co-debtor as that term is used in the statute. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under
  ¶¶ 2 and 10. DENY requests under ¶¶ 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown.
  
  After considering the Fjeldsted factors, the Court is inclined to ANNUL the automatic stay retroactive to the petition date. The Court notes that the subject property was transferred to Debtor on the petition date and there were multiple previous bankruptcy filings affecting the property. Furthermore, the property and the debt were not scheduled by Debtor and it does not appear that Movant was notified of the bankruptcy filing. Finally, the Court notes there is no opposition from Debtor, which the Court deems to be consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1) (h).
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Charlie W Parker
  
  Chapter 7
  Charlie W Parker Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
  Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung
  Roquemore Pringle & Moore Inc
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10546
  
  Rick Allen Skans
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #21.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Pacific Coach BlazeN 21FS
  
  MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION
  
  From: 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/06/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Rick Allen Skans Represented By Neil R Hedtke
  Movant(s):
  LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10766
  
  Jiovana Salinas Robles
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #22.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Camry
  
  MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jiovana Salinas Robles Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By
  Austin P Nagel
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10873
  
  Evan Todd Flynn and Elizabeth Flynn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2013 Chevrolet Sonic Vin # 1G1JC5SG3D4228424); In Addition Movant seeks Relief from Co-Debtor Stay
  
  MOVANT: ALLY BANK
  
  EH
  
  Docket 18
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Evan Todd Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Movant(s):
  Ally Bank Represented By
  Adam N Barasch
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11034
  
  Mary Simmons
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #24.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Dodge Charger, VIN: 2C3CDXBG4FH847388
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mary Simmons Represented By
  James D. Hornbuckle
  Movant(s):
  Santander Consumer USA Inc. dba Represented By
  Jennifer H Wang
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Mary Simmons
  
  Chapter 7
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11096
  
  Mercedes Estrada Ayala
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #25.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 25790 Iris Ave, #C, Moreno Valley, CA 92551
  
  MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION
  
  CASE DISMISSED 3/8/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on unauthorized transfers of the property and multiple bankruptcy cases affecting the property. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mercedes Estrada Ayala Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  FEDERAL NATIONAL Represented By Nichole Glowin
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Mercedes Estrada Ayala
  
  Chapter 7
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11134
  
  Yanina Galvan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 980 N. Pampas Ave., Rialto, CA 92376
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 18
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on multiple bankruptcy cases affecting the property and Debtor’s failure to properly prosecute the case.
  GRANT request for relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Yanina Galvan Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Yanina Galvan
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11156
  
  Frances E Brand
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #27.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2006 Nissan 350Z
  
  MOVANT: GATEWAY ONE LENDING & FINANCE
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Frances E Brand Represented By David Philipson
  Movant(s):
  Gateway One Lending & Finance Represented By
  Austin P Nagel
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11217
  
  Mardie Lois Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14139 Rideout Ct, Fontana, CA 92336
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
  
  EH
  
  Docket 14
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on multiple prior bankruptcies affecting the property. GRANT relief from § 1301(a) co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, 10, and 12. DENY requests under ¶¶ 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown. DENY request under ¶ 14 because it does not appear any relief is requested in the continuation page.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mardie Lois Washington Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Mardie Lois Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11303
  
  Edin Estuardo Monterroso and Alma Violeta Monterroso
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #29.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Camry
  
  MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edin Estuardo Monterroso Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Alma Violeta Monterroso Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt
  Movant(s):
  Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Edin Estuardo Monterroso and Alma Violeta Monterroso
  Austin P Nagel
  
  Chapter 7
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11412
  
  Jason A Kendrick and Heather L Kendrick
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #30.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 51833 Ida Avenue, Cabazon, CA 92230
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 13
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jason A Kendrick Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Heather L Kendrick Represented By Sundee M Teeple
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Jason A Kendrick and Heather L Kendrick
  
  Chapter 7
  Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Megan E Lees
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11417
  
  Carlos Diaz
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #31.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 2170 Ogden Street, San Bernardino, CA
  
  MOVANT: COBRA 28 NO. 8, LP
  
  CASE DISMISSED 3/13/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carlos Diaz Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  COBRA 28 NO. 8 LP Represented By Helen G Long
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11557
  
  Christian Bailey
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #32.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 HONDA PILOT, VIN: 5FNY F5H1 8GB0 30760
  
  MOVANT: HONDA LEASE TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 7
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  4/10/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  1. and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Christian Bailey Represented By Timothy S Huyck
    Movant(s):
    HONDA LEASE TRUST Represented By Vincent V Frounjian
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Christian Bailey
    
    Chapter 7
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-12177
    
    Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #33.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 9 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14950 Deerfield Victorville, CA 92394 with Declarations and Proof of Service. filed by Debtor Rodolfo Aguiar, Joint Debtor Irma D Aguiar) with declaration and proof of service
    
    MOVANT: RODOLFO AGUIAR AND IRMA D AGUIAR
    
    EH
    
    Docket 12
    Tentative Ruling:
    TENTATIVE RULING:
    
    4/20/2018
    
    The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for improper service. The Court notes that the motion purports to be set on regular notice, but this motion is actually being heard on shortened notice. As a result, the motion leaves notified parties with minimal time to file an objection. Furthermore, secured creditors were not served pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004 as required by this Court’s procedures.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Movant(s):
    
    Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
    
    Chapter 13
    Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
    Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-12355
    
    Marc Burns
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #34.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real property located at 6712 Bear Canyon Road, Mt. Baldy, CA 91759
    
    MOVANT: MARC BURNS
    
    EH
    
    Docket 8
    Tentative Ruling:
    TENTATIVE RULING:
    
    4/20/2018
    
    The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. The Court notes that secured creditors were not served pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004 as required by this Court’s procedures.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Marc Burns Represented By
    D Justin Harelik
    Movant(s):
    Marc Burns Represented By
    D Justin Harelik
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-12532
    
    Joseph L Gardner and Laschell D Gardner
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #34.10 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: Real Property 2824 Mellor St, Corona 92881
    
    MOVANT: M&M CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES INC
    
    EH
    
    Docket 12
    Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
    4/10/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because this is not a Chapter 13 case. GRANT requests under ¶ 2.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Joseph L Gardner Represented By
    Anthony Obehi Egbase
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Laschell D Gardner Represented By
    Anthony Obehi Egbase
    Movant(s):
    M&M Construction Enterprises Inc Represented By
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Trustee(s):
    
    Joseph L Gardner and Laschell D Gardner
    William E Windham
    
    Chapter 7
    John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10003
    
    Lenton T. Hutton
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #34.20 Motion for Order Vacating the 109(g) 180 Day Bar Prohibition Issued to the Debtor Via The Court's Dismissal Order of March 8, 2018
    
    EH
    
    Docket 28
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Brian Nomi
    Christopher Hewitt
    Movant(s):
    Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Brian Nomi
    Christopher Hewitt
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-19936
    
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #35.00 CONT Emergency motion to Approve the Stipulation Regarding DIP Financing and Modification of Cash Collateral Stipulation Between Auto Strap Transport,
    LLC and Nations Fund I, LLC
    (Final Basis) From: 3/6/18 Also #36 & #37 EH
    Docket 170
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Movant(s):
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    11:00 AM
    6:17-19936
    
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #36.00 CONT Joint Motion for Entry of An Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 105(a) and 363 Authorizing The Debtor to (A) Retain Scramble Systems, LLC to Provide the Debtor with a Chief Restructuring Officer and (B) Appoint the Chief Restructuring Officer
    (Final Basis) From: 3/6/18 Also #35 & #37 EH
    Docket 171
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    Movant(s):
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    11:00 AM
    6:17-19936
    
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #37.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 1/9/18 Also #35 & #36 EH
    Docket 48
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
    2:00 PM
    6:16-14273
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    Adv#: 6:16-01279 Allied Injury Management, Inc. v. One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group
    
    #38.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01279. Complaint by Allied Injury Management, Inc. against One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group & Therapy, Inc., One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group, Inc., Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Group, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Account Stated; and (3) Unjust Enrichment Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
    
    From: 1/24/17, 3/7/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Defendant(s):
    One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
    Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
    One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
    Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
    Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Represented By
    Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    Plaintiff(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Trustee(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
    2:00 PM
    6:16-14273
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    Adv#: 6:16-01225 Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC v. Allied Injury Management,
    
    #39.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC against Allied Injury Management, Inc., John C. Larson. 02 - Other e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
    HOLDING DATE
    
    From: 11/1/16, 12/6/16, 1/31/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 10/3/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Defendant(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    John C. Larson Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    Cambridge Medical Funding Group Represented By
    Kenneth Hennesay
    Trustee(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
    
    Chapter 11
    2:00 PM
    6:16-14273
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #40.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property of the Estate From: 10/24/17, 10/31/17, 11/28/17, 12/19/17, 1/30/18
    Also #41 & #42 EH
    Docket 303
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    10/31/2017
    The hearing on the Motion is continued to November 28, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. as a holding date.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED.
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Movant(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
    Trustee(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Steven Werth
    
    Chapter 11
    2:00 PM
    6:16-14273
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #41.00 CONT First Omnibus Objection of Debtor-In-Possession Allied Injury Management, Inc. Seeking Disallowance of Certain Proofs of Claim (Holding Date)
    
    From: 11/8/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 3/7/17,4/4/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18
    
    Also #40 & #42 EH
    Docket 83
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Movant(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Trustee(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
    2:00 PM
    6:16-14273
    
    Allied Injury Management, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #42.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
    
    From: 6/7/16, 8/30/16, 9/14/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18
    
    Also #40 & #41 EH
    Docket 7
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
    Trustee(s):
    David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
    10:00 AM
    6:17-19439
    
    Jason James Popken
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #1.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Americredit Financial Services re 2017 Chevrolet Silverado 2500H
    
    EH
    
    Docket 32
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Jason James Popken Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10486
    
    Juan Jose Jimenez and Margarita Jimenez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #2.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Wells Fargo Bank N.A. dba Wells Fargo Dealer Services Re: 2012 Toyota Yaris 4 Cyl.
    
    EH
    
    Docket 15
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Juan Jose Jimenez Represented By Stephen H Darrow
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Margarita Jimenez Represented By Stephen H Darrow
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11204
    
    Chancity Michelle Bryant
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #3.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Altura Credit Union Re: 2013 Mercedes-Benz C250
    
    EH
    
    Docket 9
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Chancity Michelle Bryant Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Altura Credit Union Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:10-11814
    
    Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #4.00 Motion to approve compromise of Estates Interest in Product Liability Claims; Approving Certain Fees and Costs
    
    EH
    
    Docket 32
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND
    
    On January 24, 2010, Scott and Karen Bosco (collectively, the "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the Debtors’ estate is an interest in a product liability claim (the "Claim") for alleged economic damages and physical injuries allegedly suffered by the Debtors as a result of a medical device implanted in Debtor, Karen Bosco.
    
    The Trustee seeks to resolve the estate’s dispute with the defendant on the Claim by way of settlement. On March 1, 2018, the Trustee filed his Motion to Approve Compromise under Rule 9019 (the "Motion"). Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
    
    The Claim is part of complex litigation pending in multiple courts, and part of a confidential, aggregate settlement reached in connection with the litigation. Pursuant to the settlement, the Debtors’ estate would receive a gross settlement amount of
    $185,000. However, under the terms of the settlement agreement various payments must be deducted from the settlement prior to disbursement to the Trustee. Exhibit 1 details fees and expenses being deducted from the gross settlement amount. The net amount to the estate is $97,897.75. However this amount may be further reduced by the Debtors should they claim an exemption in the Claim proceeds.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco
    
    Chapter 7
    DISCUSSION
    
    APPROVAL OF COMPROMISE PURSUANT TO RULE 9019
    
    Rule 9019(a) authorizes the bankruptcy court to approve a compromise or settlement on the trustee's motion and after notice and a hearing. The bankruptcy court must consider all "factors relevant to a full and fair assessment of the wisdom of the proposed compromise." Protective Comm. for Indep. Stockholders of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson, 390 U.S. 414, 424, 88 S. Ct. 1157, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1968). In
    other words, the bankruptcy court must find that the settlement is "fair and equitable" in order to approve it. Martin v. Kane (In re A & C Props.), 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986).
    
    In conducting this inquiry, the bankruptcy court must consider the following
    factors:
    
    Id.
    
    (a) the probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it; and (d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.
    
    The bankruptcy court enjoys broad discretion in approving a compromise
    because it "is uniquely situated to consider the equities and reasonableness [of
    it] " United States v. Alaska Nat'l Bank (In re Walsh Construction, Inc.), 669 F.2d
    1325, 1328 (9th Cir. 1982). As stated in A & C Props.:
    
    The purpose of a compromise agreement is to allow the trustee and the creditors to avoid the expenses and burdens associated with litigating sharply contested and dubious claims. The law favors compromise and not litigation for its own sake, and as long as the bankruptcy court amply considered the various factors that determined the reasonableness of the compromise, the court's decision must be affirmed.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco
    
    Chapter 7
    Id. (citations omitted).
    
    On the other hand, even though the bankruptcy court has wide latitude in approving compromises, its discretion is not completely unfettered. See Woodson v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (In re Woodson), 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). The trustee bears the burden of proving to the bankruptcy court that the settlement is fair and equitable and should be approved. In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d at 1382.
    
    Sufficiency of Evidence
    
    In the instant case, the Trustee has not provided a copy of the settlement agreement. Moreover, in October 2017, this Court approved the employment of special counsel Alystock Witkin Kreis & Overholtz, PLLC; The Pulaski Law Firm, PLLC; Osborne & Associates; and Anapol Weiss as special counsel. Notwithstanding, the employment of special counsel to evaluate the merits of the case on behalf of the estate, the Motion fails to include a declaration of special counsel indicating to this Court why it should find that a confidential settlement agreement provides a greater benefit to the estate than litigation of the claims on behalf of the estate.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to provide the Trustee with an opportunity to supplement the Motion with additional evidence to support the Court’s ability to make a "full and fair assessment" that the proposed compromise is fair and reasonable.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Telephonic appearance is authorized.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Scott Leon Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco
    Dana Travis
    
    Chapter 7
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Karen Lee Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis Dana Travis
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Justin Witkin
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Justin Witkin
    11:00 AM
    6:10-13285
    
    Laureen Martha Harley
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 70
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee, and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees:
    $ 1,786.27
    Trustee Expenses:
    $ 44.76
    Attorney Fees:
    $11,979.97
    Attorney Costs:
    $316.10
    
    The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Laureen Martha Harley Represented By
    James M Powell - DISBARRED - Michael H Raichelson
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Laureen Martha Harley
    
    Chapter 7
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
    11:00 AM
    6:17-12270
    
    Sherrill Fuller and Jeffrey Fuller
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 40
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
    
    Trustee Fees:
    $ 2,000
    Trustee Expenses:
    $ 47.42
    Attorney Fees:
    $6,082.50
    Attorney Costs:
    $418.16
    
    The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Sherrill Fuller Pro Se
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Jeffrey Fuller Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Sherrill Fuller and Jeffrey Fuller
    
    Chapter 7
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui
    Melissa Davis Lowe
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20226
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #7.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #27 by San Diego County Treasurer-Tax Collector Also #8 - #11
    EH
    
    Docket 143
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On October 20, 2015 ("Petition Date"), Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr. (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 27 (the "Objection") of San Diego County Treasurer – Tax Collector. ("County").
    
    OBJECTION
    
    Trustee asserts that the County filed a proof of claim asserting a secured claim for real property taxes. Trustee requests that unless the County files an amended claim, that an order be entered allowing the claim as fully secured only, which shall not share in any distribution.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, including the lack of opposition or response from the County, the Objection is SUSTAINED.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    Party Information
    
    Chapter 7
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By Vincent Renda
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20226
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #22 by Generator Services Co Inc Also #7 - #11
    EH
    
    Docket 142
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On October 20, 2015 ("Petition Date"), Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr. (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 22 (the "Objection") of Generator Services., Co. ("GSC"). The Objection calls into question the liability of the Debtors for Claim #22.
    
    OBJECTION
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    The Trustee reviewed Claim #22 and has indicated that the supporting documentation names Stringer Industries, Inc., the Debtors’ corporation as the party owing the debt. GSC has not responded to the Objection. Here, the Trustee’s Objection sufficiently calls into question whether the Debtors are personally liable for the debt of GSC and GSC for its part has failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the Debtors are liable.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, including the lack of opposition or response from GSC, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claim #22 is disallowed in its entirety.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By Vincent Renda
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20226
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #9.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #21 by Powertrip Rentals LLC Also #7 - #11
    EH
    
    Docket 141
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On October 20, 2015 ("Petition Date"), Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr. (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 21 (the "Objection") of Powertrip Rentals, LLC ("Powertrip"). The Objection calls into question the liability of the Debtors for Claim #21.
    
    OBJECTION
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    The Trustee reviewed Claim #21 and believing that Powertrip’s claim was for a debt owed by the Debtors’ corporation, contacted Powertrip to seek documentation to support personal liability for the Debtors. Powertrip has not responded to the Trustee or otherwise filed formal response to the Objection. Here, the Trustee’s Objection sufficiently calls into question whether the Debtors are personally liable for the debt of Powertrip and Powertrip for its part has failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the Debtors are liable.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, including the lack of opposition or response from Powertrip, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claim #21 is disallowed in its entirety.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    Vincent Renda
    
    Chapter 7
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20226
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #10.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #7 by WAM Software Inc Also #7 - #11
    EH
    
    Docket 140
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On October 20, 2015 ("Petition Date"), Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr. (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 7 (the "Objection") of WAM Software, Inc. ("WAM").
    
    OBJECTION
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    The Trustee reviewed Claim #7 and believing that WAM’s claim was for a debt owed by the Debtors’ corporation, contacted WAM to seek documentation to support personal liability for the Debtors. WAM provided a response that included invoices made to the Debtors’ corporation. Based on the documentation provided by WAM, WAM has failed to prove that validity of its claim in that it has not established personal liability of the Debtors.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, including the lack of opposition or response from WAM, the Objection is SUSTAINED and Claim #7 is disallowed in its entirety.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By Vincent Renda
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20226
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #11.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #4 by Riverside County Tax Collector Also #7 - #10
    EH
    
    Docket 139
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On October 20, 2015 ("Petition Date"), Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr. (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 4 (the "Objection") of the Riverside County Tax Collector ("County").
    
    OBJECTION
    
    Trustee asserts that the County filed a proof of claim asserting a secured claim for real property. Trustee requests that unless the County files an amended claim, that an order be entered allowing the claim as fully secured only, which shall not share in any distribution.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, including the lack of opposition or response from the County, the Objection is SUSTAINED.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.
    Party Information
    
    Chapter 7
    Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By Vincent Renda
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15513
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #12.00 Motion to Avoid Lien with Dodeka, LLC Also #13 - #15
    EH
    
    Docket 41
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    04/11/2018
    
    Section 522(f) provides, in pertinent part, that the debtor may avoid the fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under subsection (b).
    Similarly, § 697.340 of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides that an abstract of judgment recorded against real property attaches only to the extent of the judgment debtor's interest in the property. In re Cady, 9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2001, 266 B.R. 172, affirmed 315 F.3d 1121. (emphasis added).
    
    The Debtor seeks to avoid four judgment liens on his Property. All but one of the judgments which Debtor seeks to avoid names only "Richard Knowles" as the Defendant. One of the judgments (obtained by Discover Bank) indicates that judgment was entered against "Richard Knowles, et. al." Here, it is not clear from the documentation supporting the Motions, the extent of the Debtor’s interest or whether and to what extent Richard Knowles has an interest in the Property. Assuming that the Property is owned, in part, by Richard Knowles, the Debtor cannot avoid the liens to the extent they have attached to the interest of his co-owner. Further, it appears that the only lien that may have attached to the Debtor’s interest in the Property is the lien of Discover Bank.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    The Court’s tentative ruling is to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion for the Debtor to provide supplemental evidence regarding (1) the extent of any ownership interest of Richard Knowles in the Property; and (2) evidence regarding whether the Debtor was named as a Defendant in the suit by Discover Bank.
    
    Finally, the Court notes that the motions filed against Dodeka LLC and Arrow Fin Svcs LLC were not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 in that they were not addressed to an officer, and the motion filed against Discover Bank was not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 because the Debtor failed to serve the Discover Bank to the attention of an officer and also failed to serve Discover Bank via certified mail as required under 7004(h).
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15513
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #13.00 Motion to Avoid Lien with Arrow Financial Services LLC Also #12 - #15
    EH
    
    Docket 39
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    04/11/2018
    
    Section 522(f) provides, in pertinent part, that the debtor may avoid the fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under subsection (b).
    Similarly, § 697.340 of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides that an abstract of judgment recorded against real property attaches only to the extent of the judgment debtor's interest in the property. In re Cady, 9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2001, 266 B.R. 172, affirmed 315 F.3d 1121. (emphasis added).
    
    The Debtor seeks to avoid four judgment liens on his Property. All but one of the judgments which Debtor seeks to avoid names only "Richard Knowles" as the Defendant. One of the judgments (obtained by Discover Bank) indicates that judgment was entered against "Richard Knowles, et. al." Here, it is not clear from the documentation supporting the Motions, the extent of the Debtor’s interest or whether and to what extent Richard Knowles has an interest in the Property. Assuming that the Property is owned, in part, by Richard Knowles, the Debtor cannot avoid the liens to the extent they have attached to the interest of his co-owner. Further, it appears that the only lien that may have attached to the Debtor’s interest in the Property is the lien of Discover Bank.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    The Court’s tentative ruling is to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion for the Debtor to provide supplemental evidence regarding (1) the extent of any ownership interest of Richard Knowles in the Property; and (2) evidence regarding whether the Debtor was named as a Defendant in the suit by Discover Bank.
    
    Finally, the Court notes that the motions filed against Dodeka LLC and Arrow Fin Svcs LLC were not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 in that they were not addressed to an officer, and the motion filed against Discover Bank was not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 because the Debtor failed to serve the Discover Bank to the attention of an officer and also failed to serve Discover Bank via certified mail as required under 7004(h).
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15513
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #14.00 Motion to Avoid Lien with Eastern Municipal Water District Also #12 - #15
    EH
    
    Docket 40
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    04/11/2018
    
    Section 522(f) provides, in pertinent part, that the debtor may avoid the fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under subsection (b).
    Similarly, § 697.340 of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides that an abstract of judgment recorded against real property attaches only to the extent of the judgment debtor's interest in the property. In re Cady, 9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2001, 266 B.R. 172, affirmed 315 F.3d 1121. (emphasis added).
    
    The Debtor seeks to avoid four judgment liens on his Property. All but one of the judgments which Debtor seeks to avoid names only "Richard Knowles" as the Defendant. One of the judgments (obtained by Discover Bank) indicates that judgment was entered against "Richard Knowles, et. al." Here, it is not clear from the documentation supporting the Motions, the extent of the Debtor’s interest or whether and to what extent Richard Knowles has an interest in the Property. Assuming that the Property is owned, in part, by Richard Knowles, the Debtor cannot avoid the liens to the extent they have attached to the interest of his co-owner. Further, it appears that the only lien that may have attached to the Debtor’s interest in the Property is the lien of Discover Bank.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    The Court’s tentative ruling is to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion for the Debtor to provide supplemental evidence regarding (1) the extent of any ownership interest of Richard Knowles in the Property; and (2) evidence regarding whether the Debtor was named as a Defendant in the suit by Discover Bank.
    
    Finally, the Court notes that the motions filed against Dodeka LLC and Arrow Fin Svcs LLC were not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 in that they were not addressed to an officer, and the motion filed against Discover Bank was not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 because the Debtor failed to serve the Discover Bank to the attention of an officer and also failed to serve Discover Bank via certified mail as required under 7004(h).
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15513
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #15.00 Motion to Avoid Lien with Discover Bank Also #12 - #14
    EH
    
    Docket 42
    Tentative Ruling:
    
    04/11/2018
    
    Section 522(f) provides, in pertinent part, that the debtor may avoid the fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under subsection (b).
    Similarly, § 697.340 of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides that an abstract of judgment recorded against real property attaches only to the extent of the judgment debtor's interest in the property. In re Cady, 9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2001, 266 B.R. 172, affirmed 315 F.3d 1121. (emphasis added).
    
    The Debtor seeks to avoid four judgment liens on his Property. All but one of the judgments which Debtor seeks to avoid names only "Richard Knowles" as the Defendant. One of the judgments (obtained by Discover Bank) indicates that judgment was entered against "Richard Knowles, et. al." Here, it is not clear from the documentation supporting the Motions, the extent of the Debtor’s interest or whether and to what extent Richard Knowles has an interest in the Property. Assuming that the Property is owned, in part, by Richard Knowles, the Debtor cannot avoid the liens to the extent they have attached to the interest of his co-owner. Further, it appears that the only lien that may have attached to the Debtor’s interest in the Property is the lien of Discover Bank.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Alan Knowles
    
    Chapter 7
    The Court’s tentative ruling is to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion for the Debtor to provide supplemental evidence regarding (1) the extent of any ownership interest of Richard Knowles in the Property; and (2) evidence regarding whether the Debtor was named as a Defendant in the suit by Discover Bank.
    
    Finally, the Court notes that the motions filed against Dodeka LLC and Arrow Fin Svcs LLC were not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 in that they were not addressed to an officer, and the motion filed against Discover Bank was not served in compliance with FRBP 7004 because the Debtor failed to serve the Discover Bank to the attention of an officer and also failed to serve Discover Bank via certified mail as required under 7004(h).
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Douglas Alan Knowles Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-11670
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #16.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11 by Claimant LVNV Funding LLC Also #17 - #19
    EH
    
    Docket 84
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On March 6, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Armando Morales and Alicia Jimenez (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 4, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 11 (the "Objection") of LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV").
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    ANALYSIS:
    
    Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim
    
    In this case, the Trustee asserts that Claim #11 should be disallowed as time barred. Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).
    
    Here, LVNV’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtors and original creditor took place on October 22, 2008, and that the Claimant charged off the account on May 25, 2009. The Trustee has established that over four years have already lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim # 11 must shift to LVNV. LVNV, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    claimant, the Objection must be sustained.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claim No. 11. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    AMANDO MORALES Represented By William D Gurney
    Joint Debtor(s):
    ALICIA MALDONADO JIMENEZ Represented By
    William D Gurney
    Movant(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    11:00 AM
    6:17-11670
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #17.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 12 by Claimant Cavalry SPV I, LLC Also #16 - #19
    EH
    
    Docket 86
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On March 6, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Armando Morales and Alicia Jimenez (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 4, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 12 (the "Objection") of Cavalry SPV I, LLC ("Cavalry").
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    ANALYSIS:
    
    Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim
    
    In this case, the Trustee asserts that Claim #12 should be disallowed as time barred. Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).
    
    Here, Cavalry’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtors and original creditor took place on September 11, 2008, and that the debt was charged off on April 30, 2009. The Trustee has established that over four years have already lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim # 12 must shift to Cavalry. Cavalry, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the claimant, the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    Objection must be sustained.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claim No. 12.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    AMANDO MORALES Represented By William D Gurney
    Joint Debtor(s):
    ALICIA MALDONADO JIMENEZ Represented By
    William D Gurney
    Movant(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    11:00 AM
    6:17-11670
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #18.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 9 by Claimant Cavalry SPV I, LLC Also #16 - #19
    EH
    
    Docket 91
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On March 6, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Armando Morales and Alicia Jimenez (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 9 (the "Objection") of Cavalry SPV I, LLC ("Cavalry").
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    ANALYSIS:
    
    Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim
    In this case, the Trustee asserts that Claim #9 should be disallowed as time barred.
    Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal.
    App. 2004).
    
    Here, Cavalry’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtors and original creditor took place on or before May 5, 2009, and that the debt was charged off on April 30, 2009. The Trustee has established that over four years have already lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim # 9 must shift to Cavalry. Cavalry, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the claimant,
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    the Objection must be sustained.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claim No. 9. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    AMANDO MORALES Represented By William D Gurney
    Joint Debtor(s):
    ALICIA MALDONADO JIMENEZ Represented By
    William D Gurney
    Movant(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    11:00 AM
    6:17-11670
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #19.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 10 by Claimant LVNV Funding, LLC Also #16 - #18
    EH
    
    Docket 93
    Tentative Ruling:
    04/11/2018
    
    BACKGROUND:
    
    On March 6, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Armando Morales and Alicia Jimenez (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On March 6, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim # 10 (the "Objection") of LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV").
    
    APPLICABLE LAW:
    
    Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
    
    When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
    Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
    Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
    
    ANALYSIS:
    
    Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim
    
    In this case, the Trustee asserts that Claim #10 should be disallowed as time barred. Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).
    
    Here, LVNV’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtors and original creditor took place on November 17, 2008, and that the debt was charged off on June 23, 2009. The Trustee has established that over four years have already lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim # 10 must shift to LVNV. LVNV, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the claimant, the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO
    
    Chapter 7
    Objection must be sustained.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claim No. 10.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    AMANDO MORALES Represented By William D Gurney
    Joint Debtor(s):
    ALICIA MALDONADO JIMENEZ Represented By
    William D Gurney
    Movant(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
    11:00 AM
    6:15-21418
    
    James Lloyd Walker
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #20.00 Motion for Turnover of Property EH
    Docket 102
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    James Lloyd Walker Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
    11:00 AM
    6:17-12748
    
    William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #21.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 1/31/18
    EH
    
    Docket 74
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/2/18 AT 2:00 PM
    Tentative Ruling:
    - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
    Movant(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
    11:00 AM
    6:16-19799
    
    Jaison Vally Surace
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #22.00 Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) - No Fee Motion For Order: (1) Authorizing Sale Of Real Property; (2) Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving Payment Of Real Estate Brokers Commissions; And
    1. Finding Purchaser Is A Good Faith Purchaser
      
      [2550 San Gabriel Way #308, Corona, California 92882]
      
      Also #23 EH
      Docket 52
      
      Tentative Ruling:
      04/11/2018
      BACKGROUND
      On November 2, 2016, Jaison Vally Surace ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. John Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 2550 San Gabriel Way #308 in Corona, CA (the "Property").
      
      On March 20, 2018, the Trustee filed his Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Sale of Real Property; (2) Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving Payment of Real Estate Brokers Commissions; and (4) Finding Purchaser is a Good Faith Purchaser (the "Motion").
      
      Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed.
      
      DISCUSSION
      Sale of Estate Property Pursuant to Section 363(b)
      
      The trustee, after notice and a hearing, may sell property of the estate. 11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1); see also Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub, 471 U.S. 343, 352 (1985). The sale must be in the best interests of the estate and the price must be
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Jaison Vally Surace
      
      Chapter 7
      fair and reasonable. In re Canyon Partnership, 55 B.R. 520 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1985);
      see also In re Wilde Horse Enterprises, Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991)(sale must have fair/reasonable price, accurate/reasonable notice to creditors and sale made in good faith). The trustee must articulate some "business justification" for selling estate property out of the "ordinary course of business" before the court may approve the transaction. In re Lionel Corp., 722 F.2d 1063, 1071 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Ernst Home Ctr., Inc., 209 B.R. 974, 979 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1997). Objections to sale that are based on inadequacy of price are often resolved the court ordering an auction, which may occur in open court. Simantrob v. Claims Prosecutor, LLC (In re Lahijani), 325 B.R. 282, 287 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 6004(f).1
      
      In support of the proposed sale to Billy Mann ("Purchaser"), the Trustee sets forth the following figures and analysis:
      
      Sale Price $289,500
      
      Closing Costs (8%, including 6% broker commission) $23,160 Claim of Setareh Abbasi (settled by 9019 Order) … $155,000 Net Equity for the Estate: $111,340
      
      Based on these figures, the proposed sale to Purchaser appears reasonable and the Trustee’s business justification for the sale warrants granting of the Motion.
      1. Bidding Procedures
        
        Generally, bidding procedures must be untainted by self-dealing, encourage
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        bidding and be fair/reasonable/serve the best interests of the estate. See In re Crown Corp., 679 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1982). Here, the Trustee has proposed bidding procedures which require an initial overbid of $5,000 above the proposed purchase price of $289,500, with each additional bid in increments of $1,000, and a deposit as set forth in the Motion. The remaining overbidding procedures are outlined in the Motion. The Trustee’s proposed bidding procedures are reasonable and encourage bidding and are therefore approved.
      2. Sale Made in Good Faith
        
        The proposed sale has been brought in good faith and has been negotiated on an "arms- length" basis. The court, in Wilde Horse Enterprises, set forth the factors in considering whether a transaction is in good faith. The court stated:
        
        ‘Good faith’ encompasses fair value, and further speaks to the integrity of the transaction. Typical ‘bad faith’ or misconduct, would include collusion between the seller and buyer, or any attempt to take unfair advantage of other potential purchasers. And, with respect to making such determinations, the
        court and creditors must be provided with sufficient information to allow them to take a position on the proposed sale.
        
        Id. at 842 (citations omitted).
        
        Here, the Trustee marketed the Property via his Broker, Neiman Realty, which marketed on the MLS and conducted showings of the Property. The sale appears to be made in good faith.
      3. Purchaser in "Good Faith" Pursuant to Section 363(m)
        Section 363(m) provides that "[t]he reversal or modification on appeal of an authorization under subsection (b) or (c) of this section of a sale or lease of property does not affect the validity of a sale or lease under such authorization to an entity that purchased or leased such property in good faith…." 11 U.S.C. § 363(m).
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        
        The Trustee has provided declarations of himself, the Broker, and the Purchaser which all support the conclusion that the Purchaser has no relationship to the Debtor or to the professionals associated with the case. The evidence warrants a finding that the Purchaser has purchased in "good faith" under § 363(m) should he prevail in his bid for the Property at the hearing.
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as follows:
        
        Granting the Motion;
        Approving the sale of the Property to the Purchaser or successful overbidder;
        Finding that the Purchaser, if successful, has purchased in "good faith" (however, should another party be successful in overbidding, the Court shall require a declaration or may be sworn-in to provide evidence of "good faith" at the hearing);
        Providing that the Trustee is authorized and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the estate any and all documents as reasonably may be necessary to implement the terms of the proposed sale;
        Providing that the notice given by the Trustee in connection with the sale and hearing thereon is adequate, sufficient, proper and complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure;
        Approving the overbid procedures;
        Authorizing the payment of any unpaid property taxes, the real estate broker’s commissions, and related sale costs directly from escrow; and
        Waiving the 14-day stay prescribed by rule 6004(h) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        Debtor(s):
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
        Movant(s):
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
        Anthony A Friedman
        Trustee(s):
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
        Anthony A Friedman
        11:00 AM
        6:16-19799
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #23.00 Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) - No Fee Motion For Order: (1) Authorizing Sale Of Real Property; (2) Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving Payment Of Real Estate Brokers Commissions; And
        Finding Purchasers Are Good Faith Purchasers [27 Bella Donaci, Lake Elsinore, California 92532] Also #22
        EH
        
        Docket 53
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        04/11/2018
        BACKGROUND
        On November 2, 2016, Jaison Vally Surace ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. John Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 27 Bella Donaci, Lake Elsinore, CA 92532 (the "Property").
        
        On March 20, 2018, the Trustee filed his Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Sale of Real Property; (2) Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving Payment of Real Estate Brokers Commissions; and (4) Finding Purchaser is a Good Faith Purchaser (the "Motion").
        
        Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed.
        
        DISCUSSION
        Sale of Estate Property Pursuant to Section 363(b)
        
        The trustee, after notice and a hearing, may sell property of the estate. 11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1); see also Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub, 471 U.S. 343, 352 (1985). The sale must be in the best interests of the estate and the price must be
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        fair and reasonable. In re Canyon Partnership, 55 B.R. 520 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1985);
        see also In re Wilde Horse Enterprises, Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991)(sale must have fair/reasonable price, accurate/reasonable notice to creditors and sale made in good faith). The trustee must articulate some "business justification" for selling estate property out of the "ordinary course of business" before the court may approve the transaction. In re Lionel Corp., 722 F.2d 1063, 1071 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Ernst Home Ctr., Inc., 209 B.R. 974, 979 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1997). Objections to sale that are based on inadequacy of price are often resolved the court ordering an auction, which may occur in open court. Simantrob v. Claims Prosecutor, LLC (In re Lahijani), 325 B.R. 282, 287 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 6004(f).1
        
        In support of the proposed sale to Amgad Rizk and Christine Nasr (collectively, "Purchasers"), the Trustee sets forth the following figures and analysis:
        
        Sale Price $370,000
        
        Closing Costs (8%, including 6% broker commission) $29,600 Net Equity for the Estate: $340,400
        
        Based on these figures, the proposed sale to Purchaser appears reasonable and the Trustee’s business justification for the sale warrants granting of the Motion.
        
        Bidding Procedures
        
        Generally, bidding procedures must be untainted by self-dealing, encourage bidding and be fair/reasonable/serve the best interests of the estate. See In re Crown Corp., 679 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1982). Here, the Trustee has proposed bidding
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        procedures which require an initial overbid of $5,000 above the proposed purchase price of $370,000, with each additional bid in increments of $1,000, and a deposit as set forth in the Motion. The remaining overbidding procedures are outlined in the Motion. The Trustee’s proposed bidding procedures are reasonable and encourage bidding and are therefore approved.
        
        Sale Made in Good Faith
        
        The proposed sale has been brought in good faith and has been negotiated on an "arms- length" basis. The court, in Wilde Horse Enterprises, set forth the factors in considering whether a transaction is in good faith. The court stated:
        
        ‘Good faith’ encompasses fair value, and further speaks to the integrity of the transaction. Typical ‘bad faith’ or misconduct, would include collusion between the seller and buyer, or any attempt to take unfair advantage of other potential purchasers. And, with respect to making such determinations, the
        court and creditors must be provided with sufficient information to allow them to take a position on the proposed sale.
        
        Id. at 842 (citations omitted).
        
        Here, the Trustee marketed the Property via his Broker, Neiman Realty, which marketed on the MLS and conducted showings of the Property. The sale appears to be made in good faith.
        
        Purchaser in "Good Faith" Pursuant to Section 363(m)
        Section 363(m) provides that "[t]he reversal or modification on appeal of an authorization under subsection (b) or (c) of this section of a sale or lease of property does not affect the validity of a sale or lease under such authorization to an entity that purchased or leased such property in good faith…." 11 U.S.C. § 363(m).
        
        The Trustee has provided declarations of himself, the Broker, and the
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        Purchasers which all support the conclusion that the Purchasers have no relationship to the Debtor or to the professionals associated with the case. The evidence warrants a finding that the Purchasers have purchased in "good faith" under § 363(m) should they prevail in their bid for the Property at the hearing.
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as follows:
        
        Granting the Motion;
        Approving the sale of the Property to the Purchasers or successful overbidder;
        Finding that the Purchasers, if successful, have purchased in "good faith" (however, should another party be successful in overbidding, the Court shall require a declaration or may be sworn-in to provide evidence of "good faith" at the hearing);
        Providing that the Trustee is authorized and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the estate any and all documents as reasonably may be necessary to implement the terms of the proposed sale;
        Providing that the notice given by the Trustee in connection with the sale and hearing thereon is adequate, sufficient, proper and complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure;
        Approving the overbid procedures;
        Authorizing the payment of any unpaid property taxes, the real estate broker’s commissions, and related sale costs directly from escrow; and
        Waiving the 14-day stay prescribed by rule 6004(h) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        Movant(s):
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
        Anthony A Friedman
        Trustee(s):
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
        Anthony A Friedman
        11:00 AM
        6:16-19799
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:16-01295 Abbasi v. Surace et al
        
        #24.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Setareh Abbasi, Bruce Dannemeyer, Jaison Vally Surace against Jaison Vally Surace, Walie Qadir, Marym Qadir. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 13 - Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer, 91 - Declaratory judgment, 02 - Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy)
        (HOLDING DATE)
        
        From: 2/15/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17, 11/29/17, 3/21/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 1
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
        Defendant(s):
        Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal
        Walie Qadir Represented By
        Batkhand Zoljargal
        Marym Qadir Represented By
        Batkhand Zoljargal
        Plaintiff(s):
        Setareh Abbasi Represented By
        11:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Trustee(s):
        
        Jaison Vally Surace
        
        Bruce Dannemeyer Bruce Dannemeyer
        
        Chapter 7
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
        Anthony A Friedman
        11:00 AM
        6:13-26277
        
        Charles Frederick Biehl
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #25.00 CONT Order to show cause re Civil Contempt From: 2/14/18, 3/21/18
        EH
        
        Docket 234
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Charles Frederick Biehl Represented By
        Daryl L Binkley - DISBARRED - Steven L Bryson
        Trustee(s):
        John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
        Leonard M Shulman
        2:00 PM
        6:13-30477
        
        Master Design Inc
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:15-01370 Speier v. Test-Rite Products Corp. et al
        
        #26.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Steven M Speier against Test-Rite Products Corp., Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Ltd., Test-Rite International Co. Ltd., Judy Lee, Chester Lee, Christina Ma. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code3
        § 3439.04(a)(1) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (2) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(A) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (3) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05 and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (4) Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) and Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; (5) Conversion; (6) Unlawful Payment of Dividends; (7) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Officer; (8) Breach of Fiduciary Duty by Controlling Shareholder; and (9) Declaratory Relief as to Alter Ego Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
        
        From: 3/2/16, 4/6/16, 4/27/16, 6/29/16, 7/20/16, 8/3/16, 9/28/16, 11/9/16, 3/29/17, 8/2/17, 11/8/17, 1/10/18, 2/14/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 1
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/14/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara John Y Kim
        Defendant(s):
        Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Master Design Inc
        
        Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
        
        Chapter 7
        Test-Rite International (U.S) Co. Represented By
        Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig
        Test-Rite International Co. Ltd. Represented By Julie A Garcia Aaron S Craig Joon M Khang John Y Kim Brian Wheeler
        Chester Lee Represented By
        Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
        Christina Ma Represented By
        Julie A Garcia Joon M Khang Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
        Test-Rite International (US) Co. Ltd. Represented By
        Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia John Y Kim Aaron S Craig Brian Wheeler
        Test-Rite Products Corp. Represented By Joon M Khang Julie A Garcia
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Master Design Inc
        
        John Y Kim Aaron S Craig
        
        Chapter 7
        Plaintiff(s):
        Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe
        Trustee(s):
        Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
        2:00 PM
        6:17-12748
        
        William A. Mendez, II
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:17-01129 Hadra et al v. Mendez et al
        
        #27.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Andrew C. Hadra against William A. Mendez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
        
        From: 9/13/17, 12/13/17 EH
        Docket 1
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/6/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
        Defendant(s):
        William A. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
        Shawna D Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
        Plaintiff(s):
        Andrew C. Hadra Represented By Peter W Lianides Alan Droste
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        William A. Mendez, II
        
        Chapter 7
        Vertical Partners LLC Represented By Peter W Lianides Alan Droste
        Trustee(s):
        Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
        2:00 PM
        6:17-13649
        
        Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.
        
        #28.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment From: 2/28/18, 3/21/18
        EH
        
        Docket 29
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/13/18 AT 2:00 PM
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
        R Creig Greaves
        Defendant(s):
        Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
        R Creig Greaves
        Movant(s):
        Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
        Plaintiff(s):
        Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        Trustee(s):
        
        Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.
        
        Chapter 7
        Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
        2:00 PM
        6:18-10249
        
        Derick Jones
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:18-01038 Jones v. US Bank National Association et al
        
        #29.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Also #30
        EH
        
        Docket 5
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Derick Jones Pro Se
        Defendant(s):
        US Bank National Association Pro Se
        U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
        Nichole Glowin
        Movant(s):
        U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
        Nichole Glowin
        Plaintiff(s):
        Derick Jones Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
        2:00 PM
        6:18-10249
        
        Derick Jones
        
        Chapter 7
        Adv#: 6:18-01038 Jones v. US Bank National Association et al
        
        #30.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01038. Complaint by Derick Jones against US Bank National Association . (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
        
        Also #29 EH
        Docket 1
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M. - ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Derick Jones Pro Se
        Defendant(s):
        US Bank National Association Pro Se
        U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
        Nichole Glowin
        Plaintiff(s):
        Derick Jones Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:15-17476
        
        Michael Brian Goodrich, Sr. and Kimberly JoAnn Carter
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #1.00 Motion to Disallow Claims re claim no. 12-1 by Quantum3 Group LLC as agent for Comenity Capital Bank
        
        EH
        
        Docket 166
        Tentative Ruling:
        4/12/18
        BACKGROUND:
        
        On July 27, 2015, Michael Goodrich & Kimberly Carter ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 23, 2015, Quantum3 Group LLC ("Creditor") filed a proof of claim for an unsecured claim in the amount of $7,569 ("Claim 12"). Claim 12 states that Creditor is acting as the agent of Comenity Capital Bank. On February 2, 2016, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
        
        On March 12, 2018, Debtors filed an objection to Claim 12. Debtors argue that Claim 12 does not contain evidence establishing that Creditor can enforce collection of the claim.
        
        APPLICABLE LAW:
        
        Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Michael Brian Goodrich, Sr. and Kimberly JoAnn Carter
        
        Chapter 13
        Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
        
        When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
        
        ANALYSIS:
        
        FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(b) states: "A proof of claim shall be executed by the creditor or the creditor’s authorized agent except as provided in Rules 3004 and 3005." Debtors’ objection raises the issue of what an authorized agent is required to provide to establish that they meet the definition of an authorized agent.
        
        The Court notes that in section 8 of the official proof of claim box, the filer has the
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Michael Brian Goodrich, Sr. and Kimberly JoAnn Carter
        
        Chapter 13
        option of checking a box identifying the filer as an authorized agent under penalty of perjury. Here, Creditor did check the appropriate box. Such an assertion, made under penalty of perjury, constitutes evidence that Creditor is, in fact, the authorized agent of the entity upon whose behalf the claim was filed, and is sufficient to satisfy FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(b). See, e.g., In re Healey, 2017 WL 4863014 at *3 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 2017) ("an authorized agent need not demonstrate the existence of a power of attorney in order to file a proof of claim"); see also 9 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 3001.06 (16th ed. 2015) ("The form [Official Form 410, Item 8] previously required an authorized agent to attach documentation demonstrating a power of attorney, but the 2012 amendments deleted that requirement.."); FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9010(c) ("The authority of any agent, attorney in fact, or proxy to represent a creditor for any purpose other than the execution and filing of a proof or claim or the acceptance or rejection of a plan shall be evidenced by a power of attorney conforming substantially to the appropriate Official Form.").
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        
        The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.
        
        APPERANCES REQUIRED.
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Michael Brian Goodrich Sr. Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Kimberly JoAnn Carter Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Movant(s):
        Michael Brian Goodrich Sr. Represented By Christopher J Langley
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Trustee(s):
        
        Michael Brian Goodrich, Sr. and Kimberly JoAnn Carter
        Christopher J Langley
        
        Chapter 13
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:15-17561
        
        Cresencio Ramirez Ramirez and Maria Olga Ramirez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #2.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant Greater California Financial Services
        
        EH
        
        Docket 133
        Tentative Ruling:
        4/12/18
        BACKGROUND:
        On July 29, 2015, Crescencio & Maria Ramirez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On August 19, 2015, Greater California Financial Services ("Creditor") filed a proof of claim for a claim in the amount of $11,247.45 secured by certain real property in San Bernardino County ("Claim 2"). Claim 2 is supported by a recorded abstract of judgment with recorder’s number 2011-0457234.
        On April 14, 2016, Debtors filed a motion to avoid Creditor’s lien. On May 25, 2016, the Court denied the motion without prejudice for inadequate service and supporting evidence. On June 29, 2016, Debtors filed a second motion to avoid Creditor’s lien. The next day, the case was dismissed. On August 5, 2016, the dismissal order was vacated. On August 12, 2016, Debtors filed a third motion to avoid Creditor’s lien, which was granted on September 9, 2016, avoiding the lien with recorder’s number 2011-0457234.
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        Cresencio Ramirez Ramirez and Maria Olga Ramirez
        Chapter 13
        APPLICABLE LAW:
        
        Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
        
        When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
        
        ANALYSIS:
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Cresencio Ramirez Ramirez and Maria Olga Ramirez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        As noted in the background section, Creditor’s lien was avoided pursuant to Court order entered September 9, 2016 [Dkt. No. 93]. Therefore, Creditor’s claim is not secured and is to be treated as an unsecured claim for purposes of Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan.
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        
        The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Cresencio Ramirez Ramirez Represented By John F Brady
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Maria Olga Ramirez Represented By John F Brady
        Movant(s):
        Cresencio Ramirez Ramirez Represented By John F Brady
        Maria Olga Ramirez Represented By John F Brady
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:17-11010
        
        Gary F Pico and Mercedes P. Pico
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #3.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 3 by Claimant Quantum3 Group LLC. EH
        Docket 27
        Tentative Ruling:
        4/12/18
        BACKGROUND:
        
        On February 9, 2017, Gary & Mercedes Pico ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On March 1, 2017, Quantum3 Group LLC ("Creditor"), as agent for Credit Corp Solutions Inc., filed a proof of claim for an unsecured claim in the amount of
        $3,562.69 ("Claim 3"). On April 10, 2017, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
        
        On March 14, 2018, Debtors filed an objection to Claim 3. Due to a filing error, Debtors re-filed the objection five days later. Debtors argue that Claim 3 is insufficiently documented and that they are not liable for the debt underlying Claim 3.
        
        APPLICABLE LAW:
        
        Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Gary F Pico and Mercedes P. Pico
        
        Chapter 13
        Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
        
        When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
        
        ANALYSIS:
        
        FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(c) outlines the supporting information required to be included with a proof of claim. FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(c)(1) states:
        
        Except for a claim governed by paragraph (3) of this subdivision, when a
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Gary F Pico and Mercedes P. Pico
        
        Chapter 13
        claim, or an interest in property of the debtor securing the claim, is based on a writing, a copy of the writing shall be filed with the proof of claim. If the writing has been lost or destroyed, a statement of the circumstances of the loss or destruction shall be filed with the claim.
        
        FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(c)(3) provides that a copy of the writing need not be provided when the claim is based on an "open-end or revolving consumer credit agreement," so long as certain basic information is provided with the proof of claim. Here, Creditor has attached a statement of account information that appears to satisfy FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3001(c)(3). Nevertheless, it does not appear that Claim 3 is of the type to which that subsection applies. Specifically, the Court notes that Claim 3 identifies the basis of the claim as "money loaned" rather than a credit card or some sort of credit agreement. Therefore, it appears that Claim 3 is subject to FED. R. BANKR.
        P. Rule 3001(c)(1). Because Claim 3 does not contain a copy of the writing upon which the claim is based, the Court is inclined to disallow the claim.
        
        Furthermore, the Court notes that Creditor has not opposed the claim objection, which the Court deems consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h).
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        
        The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 3.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
        
        Party Information
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        Debtor(s):
        
        Gary F Pico and Mercedes P. Pico
        
        Chapter 13
        Gary F Pico Represented By
        Patricia M Ashcraft
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Mercedes P. Pico Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
        Movant(s):
        Gary F Pico Represented By
        Patricia M Ashcraft
        Mercedes P. Pico Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:17-11261
        
        Ernie Macias
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #4.00 CONT Order to show cause why Alon Darvish should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 105 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020
        CASE DISMISSED 3/13/17
        
        From: 11/30/17, 1/25/18 EH
        Docket 30
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/14/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Tentative Ruling:
        11/30/17
        BACKGROUND
        On February 21, 2017, Ernie Macias ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtor’s case was filed by Alon Darvish ("Darvish"). On March 13, 2017, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file information.
        
        On March 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Disgorge Attorney’s Fees ("Disgorgement Motion"). On June 13, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the UST’s Disgorgement Motion (the "Disgorgement Order"). The Disgorgement Order required Darvish to file his disclosure of compensation, and to disgorge fees received from the Debtor back to him.
        
        On September 20, 2017, the UST filed its Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why Alon Darvish Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11
        U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020 (the "Motion for OSC"). The Motion for OSC specifically asserted that Darvish had failed to comply with any part of the Disgorgement Order. The UST’s Motion for OSC further asserted that Darvish had repeatedly failed to disclose compensation and had been sanctioned for such conduct under similar circumstances in at least 6 other cases. (Motion for OSC at 9).
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Ernie Macias
        On October 20, 2017, the Court granted the Motion for OSC and ordered
        
        Chapter 13
        Darvish to show cause why he should not be held in contempt (the "OSC"). Darvish filed his response to the OSC on November 16, 2017 ("Response"). On November 21, 2017, the UST replied to the Response.
        
        DISCUSSION
        In his Response, Darvish indicated that his practice includes the filing of skeletal petitions for chapter 13 debtors for the purpose of stopping foreclosures. He indicated that when such skeletal petitions are filed, his software does not file the Disclosure of Compensation. Darvish asserts that he is a solo practitioner who is overwhelmed and understaffed and who is trying to rectify the issues in his practice. In Reply, the UST objects particularly to Darvish’s failure to outline specific steps he intends to take to remedy the issues at his firm. The UST is also concerned that Darvish has essentially admitted that his practice includes the filing of abusive petitions intended solely to avoid foreclosures. The UST requests that the Court continue the matter for Darvish to set forth specific remedial actions as ordered. The UST also requests that the Court separately consider whether a separate order to show cause is justified based on Darvish’s inherently abusive prevention practice.
        
        TENTATIVE RULING
        
        The Court agrees with the UST that Darvish’s explanation is insufficient. Darvish’s Response indicates clearly the reason for the failure to file disclosure of compensation forms. Despite this fact, he does not explain the ongoing failure to file these forms, particularly where he has previously been sanctioned for failing to disclose his compensation. The ongoing failure to file required documents, despite having already been sanctioned, supports the UST’s request for a specific plan of remediation. Absent such plan, Darvish may simply continue to rely on his thus far unreliable bankruptcy filing software.
        
        Separately, the UST’s concern regarding Darvish’s practice of filing skeletal petitions is well-taken. In particular, if Darvish is advising his clients to file abusive petitions to
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Ernie Macias
        
        Chapter 13
        delay foreclosure, such conduct may warrant further sanctions/discipline.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Ernie Macias Represented By
        Alon Darvish
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10871
        
        Francisco Javier Martinez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #5.00 Motion to Avoid JUNIOR LIEN with Bank of America c/o Veripro Solutions EH
        Docket 33
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        4/12/2018
        
        The Court having reviewed the motion, notice being proper and good cause appearing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, AVOIDING the lien of Bank of America upon receipt of a Chapter 13 discharge.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
        Movant(s):
        Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10636
        
        Alejandro J. Casillas and Patricia Casillas
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Alejandro J. Casillas Represented By Tina H Trinh
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Patricia Casillas Represented By Tina H Trinh
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10637
        
        Felipe Gonzalez Plasencia
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Felipe Gonzalez Plasencia Represented By Luis G Torres
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10684
        
        Gary Randall Wootton
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Gary Randall Wootton Represented By
        Ethan Kiwhan Chin
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10690
        
        Jesus Avila and Graciela Salcedo
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Jesus Avila Pro Se
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Graciela Salcedo Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10709
        
        Derrick Leon Worthy
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/20/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Derrick Leon Worthy Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10711
        
        Carmen Maria Sanchez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Carmen Maria Sanchez Represented By Alon Darvish
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10717
        
        Raymond J Osuna
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/20/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Raymond J Osuna Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10732
        
        Calvin S. Winn and Diana M. Winn
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Calvin S. Winn Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Diana M. Winn Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10741
        
        Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10801
        
        Michael Christopher Oropallo and Lauren Elaine Oropallo
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Michael Christopher Oropallo Represented By
        Rabin J Pournazarian
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Lauren Elaine Oropallo Represented By
        Rabin J Pournazarian
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10816
        
        Tomas Llamas-Guerra
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/20/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Tomas Llamas-Guerra Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10825
        
        William Thomas Pedrino and Terri Lyn Pedrino
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        William Thomas Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Terri Lyn Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10864
        
        Jesus Manuel Remigio
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Jesus Manuel Remigio Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10633
        
        Charles Mickey Alligood
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Charles Mickey Alligood Represented By Alon Darvish
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10873
        
        Evan Todd Flynn and Elizabeth Flynn
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Evan Todd Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Elizabeth Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10876
        
        Michelle Lorraine McPike
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Michelle Lorraine McPike Represented By Zulu Ali
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:13-30641
        
        Jacob J Cannon and Danielle M Cannon
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #22.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/1/18, 3/29/18
        EH
        
        Docket 113
        *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
        4/4/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Jacob J Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Danielle M Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:14-13083
        
        John C Tapocik and Arisia D Tapocik
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 69
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        John C Tapocik Represented By Stephen R Wade
        W. Derek May
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Arisia D Tapocik Represented By Stephen R Wade
        W. Derek May
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:14-23150
        
        Vivian Munson
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 205
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:14-24084
        
        Michael Lee Barnes and Belinda Ann Barnes
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 99
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Michael Lee Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Belinda Ann Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:15-14835
        
        Bennea Cynthia Travis
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #26.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 71
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Bennea Cynthia Travis Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:15-20646
        
        Louis Rocco Antonio Antonucci
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 58
        *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/29/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Louis Rocco Antonio Antonucci Represented By
        James P Doan
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:16-11794
        
        ROBERT A HAGUE and DIANNE L HAGUE
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #28.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 2/22/18, 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 96
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        ROBERT A HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
        Joint Debtor(s):
        DIANNE L HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:16-17031
        
        Anderson L Pepper
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #29.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 66
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:16-21234
        
        Frank A Horzen and Barbara A Horzen
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #30.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 73
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Frank A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Barbara A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-13063
        
        Ethel N Odimegwu
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #31.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Advanced From: 5/10/18
        EH
        
        Docket 72
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-15427
        
        Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #32.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18, 3/29/18
        EH
        
        Docket 51
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-16134
        
        Gerardo Garibay
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #33.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 27
        *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
        4/5/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Gerardo Garibay Represented By Alberto Carranza
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-18210
        
        Jorge Manuel Azmitia and Yoshiko Azmitia
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #34.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 38
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-19337
        
        Sandra Lorena Parra
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #35.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 25
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Sandra Lorena Parra Represented By Christopher Hewitt
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        
        Monday, April 16, 2018
        Hearing Room
        303
        
        10:00 AM
        6:13-25725
        
        Bernadette Chapman
        
        Chapter 11
        Adv#: 6:17-01046 Chapman v. U.S. Bank, NA et al
        
        #1.00 Settlement Conference (MJ Case)
        
        EH
        
        Docket 0
        
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Bernadette Chapman Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Defendant(s):
        U.S. Bank, NA Represented By
        Sonia Plesset Edwards Gwen H Ribar
        Wenjing Dai Represented By
        Robert O Marshall
        Plaintiff(s):
        Bernadette Chapman Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
        9:30 AM
        6:17-14501
        
        Julie Lynn Salazar
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #1.00 CONT Evidentiary Hearing re Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 6 by Claimant Winegardner Masonry
        
        From: 12/14/17, 12/21/17, 3/5/18 EH
        
        Docket 46
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
        Party Information
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
        Movant(s):
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
        Julie Lynn Salazar Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        9:30 AM
        6:17-14501
        
        Julie Lynn Salazar
        
        Chapter 13
        Adv#: 6:17-01213 Winegardner Masonry, Inc. v. Salazar
        
        #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01213. Complaint by Winegardner Masonry, Inc. against Julie Lynn Salazar. fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))
        Holding Date
        
        MAIN CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
        
        From: 12/21/18, 3/5/18 EH
        Docket 1
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/19/18 AT 12:30 PM
        Party Information
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
        Defendant(s):
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By
        Joseph C Markowitz
        Plaintiff(s):
        Winegardner Masonry, Inc. Represented By William A Smelko
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-20145
        
        Willie J Bryant
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #3.00 CONT Motion for Relief from Stay re 2 2015 Peterbilt 389-series Tractors 131" 6x4
        
        MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
        
        From: 3/20/18 EH
        Docket 9
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/1/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Willie J Bryant Represented By Ronald L Brownson
        Movant(s):
        BMO Harris Bank N.A. Represented By Deborah S Cochran
        Trustee(s):
        Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
        1:00 PM
        6:18-12177
        Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
        Chapter 13
        
        #1.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 9 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14950 Deerfield Victorville, CA 92394 with Declarations and Proof of Service. filed by Debtor Rodolfo Aguiar, Joint Debtor Irma D Aguiar) with declaration and proof of service
        
        MOVANT: RODOLFO AGUIAR AND IRMA D AGUIAR
        
        From: 4/10/18, 4/19/18, 4/26/18 (Advanced) EH
        Docket 12
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Movant(s):
        Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        1:00 PM
        6:18-12355
        
        Marc Burns
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #2.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real property located at 6712 Bear Canyon Road, Mt. Baldy, CA 91759
        
        MOVANT: MARC BURNS
        
        From: 4/10/18, 4/19/18, 4/26/18 (Advanced) EH
        Docket 8
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Marc Burns Represented By
        D Justin Harelik
        Movant(s):
        Marc Burns Represented By
        D Justin Harelik
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:16-18182
        
        Douglas Edward Goodman
        
        Chapter 13
        Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
        
        #1.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (Second Amended Adversary Complaint)
        
        EH
        
        Docket 79
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
        Defendant(s):
        Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
        Jose Pastora Represented By
        Andrew L Leff
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
        Movant(s):
        Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        12:30 PM
        CONT...
        
        Douglas Edward Goodman
        
        Chapter 13
        Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
        Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se
        Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
        Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se
        Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
        Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
        Plaintiff(s):
        Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:17-14501
        
        Julie Lynn Salazar
        
        Chapter 13
        Adv#: 6:17-01213 Winegardner Masonry, Inc. v. Salazar
        
        #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01213. Complaint by Winegardner Masonry, Inc. against Julie Lynn Salazar. fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))
        Holding Date
        
        MAIN CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
        
        From: 12/21/18, 3/5/18 EH
        Docket 1
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
        Defendant(s):
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By
        Joseph C Markowitz
        Plaintiff(s):
        Winegardner Masonry, Inc. Represented By William A Smelko
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:17-14501
        
        Julie Lynn Salazar
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #3.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
        
        From: 7/6/17, 10/5/17, 10/26/17, 12/14/17, 12/21/17, 3/8/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
        Party Information
        Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:17-18792
        
        Roman Negrete Manrriquez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #4.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
        
        From: 11/30/17, 12/21/17, 1/25/18, 3/1/18, 3/22/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10136
        
        Samuel Garcia and Claudia Garcia
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #5.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Samuel Garcia Represented By
        James Geoffrey Beirne
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Claudia Garcia Represented By
        James Geoffrey Beirne
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10454
        
        Scott Lawrence and Anita D Lawrence
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Scott Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Anita D Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10871
        
        Francisco Javier Martinez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10900
        
        Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #8.00 Motion for Setting Property Value Also #9
        EH
        
        Docket 22
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark
        Movant(s):
        Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark Michael E Clark
        Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark Michael E Clark Michael E Clark
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10900
        
        Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
        
        Also #8 EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10915
        
        Juana Santiago
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Juana Santiago Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10918
        
        Agustin Gonzalez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/21/18
        Party Information
        Agustin Gonzalez Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10932
        
        Andre Durham
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 2/26/18
        Party Information
        Andre Durham Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10957
        
        Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson Represented By
        Daniel King
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10958
        
        Jose Reyes Agredano
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Jose Reyes Agredano Represented By Daniel King
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10978
        
        Veronica Hernandez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Veronica Hernandez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-10983
        
        Mario Maldonado
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 3/12/18
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Mario Maldonado Pro Se
        Trustee(s):
        John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-11027
        
        Moises Martinez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
        Docket 0
        
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Moises Martinez Represented By
        Inez Tinoco-Vaca
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-12177
        
        Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #18.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 9 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14950 Deerfield Victorville, CA 92394 with Declarations and Proof of Service. filed by Debtor Rodolfo Aguiar, Joint Debtor Irma D Aguiar) with declaration and proof of service
        
        MOVANT: RODOLFO AGUIAR AND IRMA D AGUIAR
        
        From: 4/10/18 EH
        Docket 12
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Movant(s):
        Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:30 PM
        6:18-12355
        
        Marc Burns
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #19.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real property located at 6712 Bear Canyon Road, Mt. Baldy, CA 91759
        
        MOVANT: MARC BURNS
        
        From: 4/10/18 EH
        Docket 8
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Marc Burns Represented By
        D Justin Harelik
        Movant(s):
        Marc Burns Represented By
        D Justin Harelik
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:14-22236
        
        Gustavo Brito
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #20.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Make Plan Payments From: 3/22/18
        EH
        
        Docket 71
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Gustavo Brito Represented By Freddie V Vega
        Movant(s):
        California Department of Tax and Represented By
        Suman Mathews
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:15-22294
        
        Jonathan William Nicastro
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #21.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 105
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Jonathan William Nicastro Represented By
        Rabin J Pournazarian
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:16-17911
        Elizabeth T Baker
        Chapter 13
        #22.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 121
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Elizabeth T Baker Represented By Nancy Korompis
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:16-20329
        Gabriel Cruz
        Chapter 13
        #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 52
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Gabriel Cruz Represented By
        Christopher J Langley
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-11566
        Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
        Chapter 13
        #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 40
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Jose A. Gonzales Jr. Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-19432
        Ryan Eddie Hinojosa
        Chapter 13
        #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 35
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Ryan Eddie Hinojosa Represented By Steven A Alpert
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-19787
        Gloria Hayslet
        Chapter 13
        #26.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
        Docket 23
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Gloria Hayslet Represented By Nancy Korompis
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        12:31 PM
        6:17-19890
        Katrina Renee McDowell
        Chapter 13
        #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
        Docket 33
        Debtor(s):
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 4/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
        Party Information
        Katrina Renee McDowell Represented By Jenny L Doling
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:13-12182
        Stacey Jo West
        Chapter 13
        
        #1.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: Property known as 17794 Lemon St, Hesperia CA 92345
        
        MOVANT: DITECH FINANCIAL LLC
        
        EH
        
        Docket 164
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
        
        Based on the Court's review of the evidence presented by the parties, it appears Debtor is still delinquent by approximately $480.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Stacey Jo West Represented By Arnold H Wuhrman
        Movant(s):
        DITECH FINANCIAL LLC Represented By Darlene C Vigil
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:13-19245
        
        Oscar R Avila and Alice M Avila
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #2.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32164 Machado Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530
        
        MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
        
        From: 3/20/18 EH
        Docket 104
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 3/29/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Oscar R Avila Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Alice M Avila Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
        Movant(s):
        Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By
        Armin M Kolenovic
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:15-13218
        
        Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #3.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43375 Madison St, Indio, CA 92201
        
        MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
        
        From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18, 3/20/18 EH
        Docket 69
        *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
        4/9/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
        Movant(s):
        HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:15-16128
        
        Delkys Hyde
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35571 Sugar Maple St Murrieta, CA 92563
        
        MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
        
        EH
        
        Docket 41
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
        
        On March 29, 2018, Debtor filed a Motion for Authority to Sell the Property. Debtor has indicated that he intends to pay off the Movant and remainder of the chapter 13 plan through escrow. The Trustee has recommended approval of the sale. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for 30 days for Debtor to finalize sale.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Delkys Hyde Represented By
        David L Nelson
        Movant(s):
        Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Bonni S Mantovani
        S Renee Sawyer Blume
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:15-19998
        
        Jack C Pryor
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 22317 Harbor Ridge Lane #2, Torrance, CA 90502
        
        MOVANT: US BANK TRUST N.A.
        
        EH
        
        Docket 319
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) based on a failure to make at least 7 monthly payments due and owing to Movant. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT leave to offer loan workout options. GRANT order defining debtor as borrower under state law.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Jack C Pryor Represented By
        Trent Thompson
        Movant(s):
        US Bank Trust National Association Represented By
        Kristin A Zilberstein
        Trustee(s):
        Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Jack C Pryor
        
        Melissa Davis Lowe Brandon J Iskander
        
        Chapter 7
        10:00 AM
        6:15-20006
        
        Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 483 Grapevine Dr, Corona CA 92882
        
        MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
        
        EH
        
        Docket 55
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Carl J Charlot Represented By
        Michael A Younge
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge
        Movant(s):
        Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Trustee(s):
        
        Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot
        
        April Harriott Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry
        
        Chapter 13
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-11456
        
        Jose Alberto Lara-Pena and Yanisleidy Sanchez-Quinonez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2295 Mesquite Dr, San Bernardino CA 92404
        
        MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
        
        EH
        
        Docket 59
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
        
        Absent agreement on an APO, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1).
        GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout.
        
        GRANT the requested relief that upon entry of this order, for purposes of Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.5, the Debtor is a borrower as defined in Cal. Civ. Code § 2920.5(c)(2) (C).
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Jose Alberto Lara-Pena Represented By Luis G Torres
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Yanisleidy Sanchez-Quinonez Represented By Luis G Torres
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Movant(s):
        
        Jose Alberto Lara-Pena and Yanisleidy Sanchez-Quinonez
        
        Chapter 13
        Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee DeMarcus Jones
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-12118
        
        Veronica A Mendoza
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5768 Mapleview Dr Riverside, CA 92509
        
        MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA N.A.
        
        EH
        
        Docket 30
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/23/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Veronica A Mendoza Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
        Movant(s):
        Bank of America, N.A. Represented By
        Kristin A Zilberstein Kelly M Raftery
        S Renee Sawyer Blume
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-14292
        
        Lubna Shiraz Ahmed
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11846 MANHATTAN CT, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91730 UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 362
        
        MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.
        
        EH
        
        Docket 48
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/19/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Lubna Shiraz Ahmed Represented By Joshua L Sternberg
        Movant(s):
        WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By
        Dane W Exnowski
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-15102
        
        Gwendolyn Washington
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #10.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 977 Allegre Drive, Corona CA 92879
        
        MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK
        
        From: 3/20/18 EH
        Docket 54
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        3/20/2018
        
        Service is Proper Opposition: None
        
        The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
        DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
        Movant(s):
        Wells Fargo Bank, National Represented By Sean C Ferry
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Trustee(s):
        
        Gwendolyn Washington
        
        Chapter 13
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-15867
        
        Silvia Alvarez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 79685 Via Sin Cuidado, La Quinta, CA 92253
        
        MOVANT: BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC
        
        EH
        
        Docket 34
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT Relief from the stay under § 362(d)(4). Court finds that bankruptcy case was part of a scheme to hinder, delay and defraud creditors based on unauthorized transfers affecting this property. GRANT relief requested under ¶10. DENIED as to ¶ 11 for lack of cause shown.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Silvia Alvarez Represented By
        Filemon Kevin Samson III
        Movant(s):
        BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, Represented By
        Edward G Schloss
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-17134
        
        Noel Mallari
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 31932 COPPER TERRACE Menifee, CA 92584 UNDER 11
        U.S.C. § 362
        
        MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION
        
        EH
        
        Docket 23
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
        
        Parties to update Court regarding APO discussions. Absent agreement, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT termination of the co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT authority to offer loan workout options.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Noel Mallari Represented By
        David L Nelson
        Movant(s):
        Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By John D Schlotter
        Dane W Exnowski
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Noel Mallari
        
        Chapter 13
        10:00 AM
        6:17-17806
        
        Gerald Curtis Collins and Valerie Cecelia Collins
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #13.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35247 Sunnyside Drive, Yucaipa, California 92399
        
        MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
        
        From: 3/20/18 EH
        Docket 31
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/11/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Gerald Curtis Collins Represented By
        M Wayne Tucker
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Valerie Cecelia Collins Represented By
        M Wayne Tucker
        Movant(s):
        U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
        Armin M Kolenovic
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-18531
        
        Victor Manuel Rosales
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9215 TROVITA CIRCLE Riverside, CA 92508 UNDER 11
        U.S.C. § 362.
        
        MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
        
        EH
        
        Docket 28
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/10/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Victor Manuel Rosales Represented By
        D Justin Harelik
        Movant(s):
        DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST Represented By
        Dane W Exnowski
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-19154
        
        Ernesto Sanchez
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #15.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1300 Tejon Ave, Colton CA 92324
        
        MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION
        
        EH
        
        Docket 46
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Ernesto Sanchez Represented By Jerry Rulsky
        Movant(s):
        Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By Christina J O
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Ernesto Sanchez
        
        Chapter 13
        10:00 AM
        6:17-19281
        
        Anthony J McPike
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #16.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 39764 Chambray Dr Murrieta, CA 92563
        
        MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
        
        EH
        
        Docket 35
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
        
        Debtor is three payments behind. Absent APO agreement, Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT termination of the co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to authority to offer loan workout options.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Anthony J McPike Represented By Dana Travis
        Movant(s):
        The Bank of New York Mellon, et al Represented By
        Bonni S Mantovani
        S Renee Sawyer Blume
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:17-20121
        
        Agustin Napolion Joya and Dora Maria Joya
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #17.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1365 Riverstone Crt Hemet, CA 92545 UNDER 11 USC § 362
        
        MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC dba MR COOPER
        
        EH
        
        Docket 41
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT leave to offer loan workout options. GRANT order defining debtor as borrower under state law. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Agustin Napolion Joya Represented By Daniel King
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Dora Maria Joya Represented By Daniel King
        Movant(s):
        Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By
        Dane W Exnowski
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Trustee(s):
        
        Agustin Napolion Joya and Dora Maria Joya
        
        Chapter 13
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-10074
        
        Charlie W Parker
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #18.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY Re: AP13F Floating Pallet Fork, GM1060R Rear Groomig Mower, LP1160 5' 3pt Land Plane, RC2060 Rotary Cutter, 3038E Compact Utility Tractor, D160 NSL Loader
        
        MOVANT: DEERE & COMPANY
        
        EH
        
        Docket 23
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Charlie W Parker Pro Se
        Movant(s):
        Donald T. Dunning T. DEERE & Represented By
        Donald T Dunning
        Trustee(s):
        Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung
        Roquemore Pringle & Moore Inc
        10:00 AM
        6:18-10971
        
        Ryan James Masalcas
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #19.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Dodge Ram 1500 Pro Master
        
        MOVANT: ALLY BANK
        
        EH
        
        Docket 12
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Ryan James Masalcas Represented By Jenny L Doling
        Movant(s):
        Ally Bank Represented By
        Adam N Barasch
        Trustee(s):
        Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-11239
        
        John D. Verrell and Amber N. Verrell
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ram 1500
        
        MOVANT: GATEWAY ONE LENDING & FINANCE
        
        EH
        
        Docket 14
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        John D. Verrell Represented By
        James D. Hornbuckle
        Joint Debtor(s):
        Amber N. Verrell Represented By
        James D. Hornbuckle
        Movant(s):
        Gateway One Lending & Finance Represented By
        Austin P Nagel
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Trustee(s):
        
        John D. Verrell and Amber N. Verrell
        
        Chapter 7
        Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-11556
        
        Calvin Deshune Bass
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #21.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 36626 Torrey Pines Dr, Beaumont CA 92223
        
        MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA
        
        EH
        
        Docket 9
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        
        GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Calvin Deshune Bass Represented By James P Doan
        Movant(s):
        HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Nancy L Lee
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Trustee(s):
        
        Calvin Deshune Bass
        
        Chapter 7
        Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-11986
        
        Ardreda Lynn Johnson
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #22.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 7352 Stonehaven Place, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
        
        MOVANT: CROSBY CAPITAL USA LLC
        
        CASE DISMISSED 4/18/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 13
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Ok Opposition: Yes
        
        Standing
        A party seeking relief from the stay "need only establish that it has a colorable claim to enforce a right against property of the estate." In re Pak, 2011 WL 7145763 (9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2011). A showing by a party that it is a person entitled to enforce the note at issue or that it holds some ownership or other interest in the note translates to a colorable claim. Id.
        
        Here, Movant has provided a copy of the Note (Ex. 1), the original Deed of Trust (Ex. 2), and a series of recorded assignment deeds which sufficiently establish chain of title in the Movant (Ex. 3). Based on this evidence, the Court finds that Movant has made a colorable claim that it has the right to enforce its property rights against the subject Property. The Debtor’s standing arguments are overruled.
        
        Scope of proceedings
        A motion for stay relief is a summary proceeding. In re Santa Clara County Fair Ass'n, Inc., 180 B.R. 564 (9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 1995) (citing In re Computer Communications, Inc., 824 F.2d 725, 729 (9th Cir.1987)). In a summary proceeding, the court's discretion is broad. Courts may consider the factor of judicial economy
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        
        Ardreda Lynn Johnson
        
        Chapter 13
        when deciding lift stay issues. Id.
        
        The only triable issues in a Motion for Relief from Stay are (1) lack of adequate protection; (2) the debtor's equity in the property; and (3) the necessity of the property to an effective reorganization of the debtor, or (4) the existence of other cause for relief from the stay. In re Computer Communications, Inc., 824 F.2d 725, 729.
        
        Here, the issues and defenses surrounding the validity of the underlying security and whether the Movant is empowered to pursue foreclosure actions under state law do not directly relate to the lifting of the stay, and accordingly they are not issues that are before the bankruptcy court. The irregularities raised by the Debtor are more properly considered by a state court in the determination of an unlawful detainer action.
        
        Relief from Stay
        The Movant has provided evidence that the Debtor’s instant bankruptcy filing is part of a scheme to hinder/delay enforcement of its rights. Specifically, Exhibit 7 to the Motion is a Grant Deed which indicates that the Debtor attempted, without authorization of her lender, to grant a partial interest in the Property to Willie Anderson on or about December 18, 2017. Movant has further provided evidence that Willie Anderson filed bankruptcy in January 2018 and had his case dismissed on February 20, 2018. Finally, the Court’s docket reflects that the Debtor’s own case has been dismissed as of April 18, 2018, for failure to file information. In her opposition the Debtor fails to address, controvert or provide any meritorious objection to the evidence filed by Movant.
        
        Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion pursuant to §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(4). GRANT as to ¶¶ 2, 3, and 6. Additionally, the Court waives the 14-day stay. The request as to ¶10 is GRANTED with the modification that the order must be recorded in compliance with applicable nonbankruptcy law.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Ardreda Lynn Johnson Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        CONT...
        Movant(s):
        
        Ardreda Lynn Johnson
        
        Chapter 13
        Crosby Capital USA LLC Represented By
        Armin M Kolenovic
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-12312
        
        Allan Gabriel Reyes
        
        Chapter 7
        
        #23.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 2250 W Mill Street Space 95 Colton CA 92324
        
        MOVANT: COLTON MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY LLC
        
        EH
        
        Docket 12
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
        The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Allan Gabriel Reyes Represented By Benjamin R Heston
        Movant(s):
        Colton Mobile Home Community, Represented By
        Barry L O'Connor
        Trustee(s):
        Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
        10:00 AM
        6:18-12567
        
        Jaelyn Roylene Young
        
        Chapter 13
        
        #24.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property
        
        MOVANT: JAELYN YOUNG
        
        EH
        
        Docket 14
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        04/24/2018
        
        Service appears proper and no opposition has been filed. The Debtor has provided sufficient evidence that her new employment with Flagship Facility Services, Inc. is likely to provide sufficient disposable income with which to propose a feasible plan. The Debtor has overcome the presumption that the case was filed in bad faith.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Movant(s):
        Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
        Trustee(s):
        Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        Adv#: 6:16-01279 Allied Injury Management, Inc. v. One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group
        
        #25.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01279. Complaint by Allied Injury Management, Inc. against One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group & Therapy, Inc., One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group, Inc., Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Group, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Account Stated; and (3) Unjust Enrichment Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
        
        From: 1/24/17, 3/7/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 1
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Defendant(s):
        One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
        Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
        One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
        Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
        Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Represented By
        Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        Plaintiff(s):
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        Adv#: 6:16-01225 Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC v. Allied Injury Management,
        
        #26.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC against Allied Injury Management, Inc., John C. Larson. 02 - Other e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
        HOLDING DATE
        
        From: 11/1/16, 12/6/16, 1/31/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 10/3/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18
        
        EH
        
        Docket 1
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Defendant(s):
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        John C. Larson Pro Se
        Plaintiff(s):
        Cambridge Medical Funding Group Represented By
        Kenneth Hennesay
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        
        Chapter 11
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #27.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
        
        From: 6/7/16, 8/30/16, 9/14/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18
        
        Also #28 - #30
        
        EH
        
        Docket 7
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #28.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property of the Estate
        
        From: 10/24/17, 10/31/17, 11/28/17, 12/19/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18 Also #27 - #30
        EH
        
        Docket 303
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        10/31/2017
        The hearing on the Motion is continued to November 28, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. as a holding date.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED.
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Movant(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Steven Werth
        
        Chapter 11
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #29.00 CONT First Omnibus Objection of Debtor-In-Possession Allied Injury Management, Inc. Seeking Disallowance of Certain Proofs of Claim (Holding Date)
        
        From: 11/8/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 3/7/17,4/4/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18
        
        Also #27 - #30
        
        EH
        
        Docket 83
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Movant(s):
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        2:00 PM
        6:16-14273
        
        Allied Injury Management, Inc.
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #30.00 CONT Application for Compensation of Final Fees and/or Expenses with proof of service for Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/11/2016 to 12/5/2016, Fee: $278,079.00, Expenses: $4,603.13
        
        From: 12/19/17 Also #27 - #29
        EH
        
        Docket 306
        *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/9/18 AT 2:00 PM
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Movant(s):
        Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP Represented By Alan W Forsley
        Trustee(s):
        David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
        2:00 PM
        6:17-15816
        
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #31.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
        
        From: 2/6/18, 2/13/18, 3/6/18, 3/20/18 Also #32 & #33
        EH
        
        Docket 102
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
        Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
        2:00 PM
        6:17-15816
        
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #32.00 Debtor's Disclosure Statement Accompanying Debtor's Chapter 11 Plan Also #31 & #33
        EH
        
        Docket 200
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        
        Debtor(s):
        
        Party Information
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
        Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
        2:00 PM
        6:17-15816
        
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #33.00 CONT Motion to Appoint a Chapter 11 Trustee From: 3/20/18
        Also #31 & #32 EH
        Docket 173
        *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/23/18
        Tentative Ruling:
        - NONE LISTED -
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
        Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
        Movant(s):
        United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
        2:00 PM
        6:17-19936
        
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #34.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: Vehicles
        
        MOVANT: SIEMENS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
        
        Also #35 & #36 EH
        Docket 243
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        04/24/2018
        Service is Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO DENIED as moot.
        
        APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
        
        Party Information
        Debtor(s):
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Movant(s):
        Siemens Financial Services, Inc. Represented By
        Jeannie Kim
        2:00 PM
        6:17-19936
        
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #35.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: Personal Property.
        
        MOVANT: CELTIC BANK CORPORATION
        
        Also #34 & #36 EH
        Docket 246
        
        Tentative Ruling:
        04/24/2018
        Service is Proper Opposition: None
        
        GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO DENIED as moot.
        
        GRANTED as to ¶¶ 8 and 9. DENIED as to ¶¶7 and 10 for lack of cause shown.
        
        As to the additional relief requested by Movant, the Court GRANTS Movant authority to enforce its State law remedies including as provided for in the Master Lease Agreement at ¶ 16, pgs. 7-8 (Exhibit A to Zern Declaration) and the Pledge Agreement at ¶ 7 and Cash Collateral Pledge and Security Agreement at Section 6.
        See Exhibits 1 and 2 to Zern Decl.; and to allow relief from stay for immediate application by Movant of the security deposit to outstanding arrears described in Attachment A.
        
        Parties to discuss terms of turnover.
        
        APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
        Party Information
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        Debtor(s):
        
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC
        
        Chapter 11
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
        Movant(s):
        Celtic Bank Corporation Represented By
        Kathryn M.S. Catherwood
        2:00 PM
        6:17-19936
        
        Auto Strap Transport, LLC
        
        Chapter 11
        
        #36.00 Motion to Compel Assumption or Rejection of Defaulted Contract Regarding Personal Property; For Provision of Adequate Protection and Maintenance Payments; and for Relief from Stay in Event of Rejection of Contract
        
        Also #34 & #35 EH
        Docket 198
        Tentative Ruling:
        04/24/2018
        
        BACKGROUND
        
        On December 1, 2017, Auto Strap Transport, LLC ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. Among the assets of the Debtor’s estate is certain leased equipment described as a 2016 Peterbilt 389 Tractor, Vin Number 1NPXL49X7GD301762 and the 2016 CX-11 Cottrell Trailer, Vin Number VIN5E0AJ144XGG737101 (the "Equipment"). The Equipment is was leased to the Debtor by CIT Finance LLC ("CIT") pursuant to an Equipment Finance Agreement (the "Agreement").
        
        On March 8, 2018, CIT filed its Motion To Compel Assumption Or Rejection Of Defaulted Contract Regarding Personal Property ("Motion"). The Motion seeks (1) an Order requiring the Debtor to assume or reject the Agreement by April 10, 2018;
  2. an Order requiring that Debtor provide adequate protection of Movant’s interest in the Equipment, including, but not limited to maintenance of appropriate insurance coverage on the Equipment as required by the Agreement, (3) an order requiring that Debtor maintain payments to Movant under 11 U.S.C § 365(d)(5) until said Agreement is assumed or rejected; and (4) an Order terminating the automatic stay in the event the Agreement is rejected. If no responsive pleading is filed, the Movant requests that the Agreement be deemed rejected and that the automatic stay be vacated as to the Equipment.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  
  Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Assumption or Rejection of Lease
  In a case under chapter 11, a debtor in possession may assume an unexpired lease of personal property at any time prior to confirmation of a plan. Zions Credit Corp. v. Rebel Rents, Inc., Perris Valley Rentals, Inc.(In re Rebel Rents, Inc., Perris Valley Rentals, Inc.), 291 B.R. 520, 529 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2003) (citing 11 U.S.C. § 365(a) & (d)(2)). It is the policy of the Bankruptcy Code to provide the debtor with breathing space following the filing of the petition, continuing until the confirmation of a plan, in which to assume or reject an unexpired lease. See In re Enron Corp., 279
  B.R. 695, 702 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.2002). However, the court, on request of a party to a lease, may order the debtor in possession to determine within a specified period of time whether to assume or reject. 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(2).
  
  Here, the Debtor, though properly served with the Motion, has failed to file opposition or response. Additionally, CIT has provided evidence that Debtor is in default on payments due and owing to CIT under the terms of the Agreement (specifically "for the monthly rental payments coming due on December 1, 2017, respectively … The aggregate monthly Lease payment, inclusive of taxes is
  $5,868.16."). (Lleras Decl. ¶4). Based on the evidence that the Debtor is not abiding by the terms of the Agreement and based also on the Debtor’s failure to file any response to the Motion, the Court finds that an order compelling immediate rejection of the Agreement is warranted.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion deeming the Agreement rejected as of the hearing date of April 24, 2018, based on the Debtor’s failure to file opposition or response. Additionally, CIT’s Motion sets forth sufficient cause for lifting of the automatic stay. The remaining requests for relief are DENIED
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  as moot. CIT may pursue its state law remedies to seek turnover of the Equipment.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  CIT Group, Inc. Represented By
  Brian C Vanderhoof
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10628
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #37.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2,5 by Claimant American Express Bank FSB
  
  Also #38 EH
  Docket 49
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/24/2018
  
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On January 26, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Markus Anthony Boyd ("Debtor") filed for chapter 11 relief. On March 19, 2018, Debtor filed Objection to Claims # 2 and 5 (the "Objection") of American Express FSB. Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
  Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
  Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  
  The Debtor objects to Claims No. 2 and 5 on the basis that the applicable state statute of limitations for collection of the debts in question has lapsed. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).
  
  Debtor has provided evidence that Claim No. 2 was charged off in May 2008 and that the last transaction recorded by Claimant was in November 2007. Debtor has provided evidence that Claim No. 5 was charged off in August 2008 and that the last transaction recorded by Claimant was in December 2007. The Debtor has established that over four years have lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claims No. 2 and 5 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claims No. 2 and 5.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  Movant(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10628
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #38.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 4,6 by Claimant American Express Centurion Bank
  
  Also #37 EH
  Docket 50
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/24/2018
  
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On January 26, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Markus Anthony Boyd ("Debtor") filed for chapter 11 relief. On March 19, 2018, Debtor filed Objection to Claims # 4 and 6 (the "Objection") of American Express Centurion Bank. Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
  Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
  Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  
  The Debtor objects to Claims No. 4 and 6 on the basis that the applicable state statute of limitations for collection of the debts in question has lapsed. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).
  
  Debtor has provided evidence that Claim No. 4’s last transaction date was in October 2007. Debtor has provided evidence that Claim No. 5’s last payment date was in December 2007. The Debtor’s analysis of the potential time tolled by the Debtor’s intervening bankruptcy cases appears correct and thus Debtor has established that over four years have lapsed since the last item in the accounts. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claims No. 4 and 6 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED as to Claims No. 4 and 6.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  Movant(s):
  Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10939
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #39.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 3/6/18 EH
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  2:00 PM
  6:18-11806
  
  Rick's Patio Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #40.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
  (2) Requiring Status Report Also #41
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  2:00 PM
  6:18-11806
  
  Rick's Patio Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #41.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Authorization to Use Cash Collateral and Provide Adequate Protection
  FINAL HEARING
  
  From: 3/12/18 Also #40
  EH
  
  Docket 5
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  Movant(s):
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
  11:00 AM
  6:15-14230
  
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Motion for Order Extending Time to File Avoidance Actions Under 11 U.S.C. § 546
  
  EH
  
  Docket 98
  Tentative Ruling:
  4/25/18
  BACKGROUND
  On April 28, 2015, Home Security Stores, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On May 28, 2015, the Court authorized the employment of Goe & Forsythe, LLP as general counsel to Trustee. On July 2, 2015, the Court authorized the employment of Hahn Fife & Co. LLP as accountants for Trustee. On July 17, 2015, the Court authorized the employment of Credit Management Association as auctioneer for Trustee.
  On April 20, 2016, the Court extended the deadline for Trustee to file avoidance actions by six months, to October 28, 2017. On April 28, 2017, the Trustee filed an avoidance action. On October 30, 2017, the Court extended the deadline for Trustee to file avoidance actions by an additional six months. On April 4, 2018, Trustee filed a third motion to extend the deadline to file avoidance actions, requesting an additional six months. On April 11, 2018, Ralph & Stacy Winn (the "Winns"), shareholders of Debtor, filed a limited opposition to Trustee’s request. The Winns do not oppose an extension of the deadline to file avoidance actions, rather they appear to generally dispute the Trustee’s characterization of their role in the proceedings.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  Chapter 7
  Trustee continues to maintain that Debtor and various associated individuals have been uncooperative with requests for information. The Court notes that on January 26, 2017, a 2004 examination was ordered of Harry Histen ("Histen"), a prior attorney for Debtor. Furthermore, on April 20, 2017, the Court granted Trustee’s motion to compel Histen’s turnover of recorded information. Trustee asserts that as part of Histen’s production of electronic files, Trustee learned that, in April 2015, We Got’cha Covered made copies of Debtor’s hard drive and recovered deleted files.
  Trustee asserts that "[n]otwithstanding multiuple [sic] demands to Debtor and its principals for such documents, these records were never produced." Trustee argues that he needs this information to assess whether any additional avoidance actions are appropriate.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  11 U.S.C. § 546 requires that an avoidance action be brought within two years of the entry of the order for relief. That deadline, however, can be extended. See, e.g., In re United Ins. Mgmt., Inc., 14 F.3d 1380, 1384 (9th Cir. 1994). The current deadline in this case is April 30, 2018, which Trustee seeks to extend for six months to and including October 30, 2018.
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9006(b) states:
  
  Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subdivision, when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified period by these rules or by a notice given thereunder or by order of court, the court for cause shown may at any time in its discretion (1) with or without motion or notice order the period enlarged if the request therefor is made before the expiration of the period originally prescribed or as extended by a previous order or (2) on motion made after the expiration of the specified period permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  
  Chapter 7
  The Court adopts a "for cause" standard when determining whether to utilized FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9006(b) to extend a deadline. See In re Fundamental Long Term Care, Inc., 501 B.R. 784, 789 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2013). In this case, Trustee’s motion indicates that Histen, We Got’cha Covered, and Debtor have not been fully cooperative with, and possibly obstructive of, Trustee’s attempt to investigate Debtor’s financial affairs. Trustee indicates that he does not yet have the information necessary to assess whether further avoidance actions are necessary, and it appears that such delay is through no fault of Trustee.
  
  Moreover, the Court deems lack of opposition as consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
  Movant(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  
  Charity J Miller
  
  Chapter 7
  2:00 PM
  6:12-37346
  
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:13-01111 Vega v. Barrios
  
  #2.00 CONT Opposition to Claim of Exemption (Wage Garnishment) From: 3/7/18
  Also #3 EH
  Docket 46
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By David H Chung
  Defendant(s):
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By
  Andrew Edward Smyth
  Plaintiff(s):
  Crystal Vega Represented By
  Mirna El Hazin
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:12-37346
  
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:13-01111 Vega v. Barrios
  
  #3.00 Motion for an order determining the claim of exemption Also #2
  EH
  
  Docket 54
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By David H Chung
  Defendant(s):
  Carmen Elisabeth Barrios Represented By
  Andrew Edward Smyth
  Movant(s):
  Crystal Vega Represented By
  Mirna El Hazin
  Plaintiff(s):
  Crystal Vega Represented By
  Mirna El Hazin
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27611
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns
  
  #4.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01163. Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation against Don C. Burns. (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)
  
  From: 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 8/2/17, 8/23/17, 11/8/17, 1/31/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Defendant(s):
  Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
  Plaintiff(s):
  Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
  Trustee(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Carmela Pagay Franklin R Fraley Jr
  
  Chapter 7
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27611
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD
  
  #5.00 Status Conference RE: Amended Complaint (First) by Revere Financial Corporation and Jerry Wang, as State-Court Appointed Receiver by Franklin R Fraley Jr on behalf of Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation against Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-8)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 82
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/13/18 AT 2:00 PM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Defendant(s):
  Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Plaintiff(s):
  Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
  Jerry Wang Represented By
  Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
  Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:17-14684
  
  Timothy Wayne Lambert
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01026 United States Trustee for the Central District of v. Lambert et al
  
  #6.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01026. Complaint by United States Trustee for the Central District of California, Region 16 against Timothy Wayne Lambert, Lisa Renee Lambert. (Fee Not Required). with adversary cover sheet Nature of Suit: (41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))) (Green, Everett)
  
  From: 3/21/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Defendant(s):
  Timothy Wayne Lambert Pro Se
  Lisa Renee Lambert Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Plaintiff(s):
  United States Trustee for the Central Represented By
  Everett L Green
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Timothy Wayne Lambert
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15043
  
  Sandra Lou Harter
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01040 Cisneros v. Harter et al
  
  #7.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint by A. Cisneros against Joseph Harter, Connie Flach, John Rose, Tammy Rose, Brennan Rose, KayLynne Rose. (Charge To Estate - $350.00) .- Complaint for: 1) Declaratory Relief; 2) Turnover of Property; and 3) Sale of Interest of Co-Owner in Property of the Estate [11
  U.S.C. §§ 363 and 542] - Nature of Suit: 91 - Declaratory judgment, 11 Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property, 31 - Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Defendant(s):
  Joseph Harter Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Connie Flach Pro Se
  John Rose Represented By
  Dina Farhat
  Tammy Rose Represented By
  Dina Farhat
  Brennan Rose Represented By Dina Farhat
  KayLynne Rose Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Sandra Lou Harter
  
  Dina Farhat
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  Anthony A Friedman
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10249
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01038 Jones v. US Bank National Association et al
  
  #8.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01038. Complaint by Derick Jones against US Bank National Association . (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/2/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  US Bank National Association Pro Se
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  Plaintiff(s):
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:13-30133
  
  Nabeel Slaieh
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh
  
  #9.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01081. Complaint by
  W.E. Jon Albrecht against Nabeel Slaieh. willful and malicious injury))
  HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 10/19/16, 12/14/16, 2/15/17, 3/29/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Nabeel Slaieh Represented By George A Saba
  Defendant(s):
  Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice George A Saba
  Plaintiff(s):
  W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By
  D Edward Hays David Wood
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Nabeel Slaieh
  
  Matthew Grimshaw
  
  Chapter 7
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #10.00 Motion to Withdraw Alleged Admissions To Trustees Requests For Admission Also #11 - #13
  EH
  
  Docket 49
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #11.00 CONT Order to show cause why defendant's counsel should not be sanctioned From: 1/10/18
  Also #10 - #13
  
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #12.00 Motion for Summary Judgment Against Defendant Carolina Villalobos Navarro Also #10 - #13
  EH
  
  Docket 42
  Tentative Ruling:
  4/25/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On April 12, 2016, Jose Hernandez ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 7, 2016, the Chapter 7 Trustee ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Carolina Navarro ("Defendant") seeking the avoidance and recovery of a fraudulent transfer.
  After default was entered against Defendant, on October 14, 2016, the parties stipulated to set aside default, and, that same day, Defendant filed her answer. On March 1, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 4, 2018, Defendant filed her opposition.
  
  Plaintiff alleges that on July 21, 2014, Debtor transferred certain real property located at 3510 Duffy St., San Bernardino, CA 92407 to Defendant for no consideration and that Debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Defendant received a Chapter 7 discharge on January 26, 2018.
  
  DISCUSSION
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  1. Violation of Discharge Injunction
    
    As a preliminary matter, Defendant argues that because she obtained her own discharge in January, the continuation of this proceeding violates her discharge injunction. Specifically, Defendant argues that her discharge extinguishes her personal liability and that Trustee’s complaint seeks avoidance of the transfer and recovery of the property or its value. Defendant’s opposition states:
    
    Notwithstanding his heightened knowledge of the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and bankruptcy jurisprudence, the Trustee has pursued the same claims and remedies against Defendant after her discharge was granted, relieving her of any personal liability on account of the Trustee’s alleged claims and barring the Trustee from obtaining relief in this case. For example, the Trustee seeks judgment on his Fifth Claim, which as pled in the Complaint, alleges that "Plaintiff is entitled to recovery the Subject Property or its value from the Defendant Pursuant to § 550(a)."
    [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 12-13].
    
    Defendant’s argument is misleading and lacks merit. Regardless of the relief requested in the complaint, which was filed before Defendant obtained a discharge, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment has dropped the reference to "or its value" and only seeks recovery of the subject property. Nothing in the motion for summary judgment seeks to enforce a personal liability of the Defendant. Therefore, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument.
  2. Motion for Summary Judgment
    
    Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R. BANKR. P. 7056).
    
    The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    
    Chapter 7
    material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324; see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(e). The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.
    
    If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).
    
    A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.
    
    Plaintiff requests summary judgment on the second claim for relief (avoidance of constructively fraudulent transfer) and the fifth claim for relief (recovery of avoided transfer). 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) states, in pertinent part:
    
    (a)(1) The trustee may avoid any transfer (including any transfer to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) of an interest of the debtor in property, or any obligation (including any obligation to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) incurred by the debtor, that was made or incurred on or within 2 years before the date of the filing of the petition, if the debtor voluntarily or involuntarily --
    
    (B)(i) received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for such transfer or obligation; and
    
    (ii)(I) was insolvent on the date that such transfer was made or such obligation was incurred, or became insolvent as a result of such transfer or obligation
    
    Defendant does not dispute that there was a transfer of an interest of property within 2
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    
    Chapter 7
    years before the petition date. Defendant does, however, dispute the satisfaction of the other two elements, arguing that Defendant received reasonably equivalent value and was not rendered insolvent by the subject transfer. See generally In re Fruehauf Trailer Corp., 444 F.3d 203, 210 (3rd Cir. 2006); In re Southern Textile Knitters, 65 Fed. Appx. 426, 436 (4th Cir. 2003) (outlining elements of § 548(a)(1)(B) action).
    
    Regarding the requirement that reasonably equivalent value have been provided, Plaintiff asserts that the grant deed reflects that the transfer was a "bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return." In her opposition, Defendant argues that the language of the grant deed is inaccurate, and that she offered value in a variety of ways. Specifically, Defendant contends that she was a co-signer for the refinancing and "also provided consideration by contributing her wages to pay for household expenses and by providing domestic labor including cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, and running the parties’ household." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 17, lines 7-9]. With regard to the language on the grant deed, Defendant states that:
    
    The Grant Deed was not prepared by Debtor or Defendant. Debtor and Defendant correctly advised the loan officer who handled the refinancing that Defendant was not paying cash to Debtor for her one-half interest. For this reason, Debtor and Defendant believe the loan officer or escrow agent who prepared the Grant Deed noted on the document that the Transfer was a gift.
    [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 5, lines 1-5].
    
    In the reply, Plaintiff contends that "[a]fter first stating that it was a gift and nothing was received, the Debtor and Defendant should be estopped from now claiming it was not a gift and reasonably equivalent value was provided for the Subject Transfer." [Dkt. No. 51, pg. 4, lines 13-15].
    
    The Court concludes that the parol evidence rule applies here to preclude the consideration of evidence which contradicts the plain and unambiguous language of the deed. See generally In re Khalil, 2014 WL 1725811 at *6-11 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2014) (collecting cases providing comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule in the context of grant deeds deed). As was noted in Khalil:
    
    If there is no ambiguity on the face of the document, and no reference to information or terms in the recorded document or from the circumstances of the conveyance that would lead a bona fide purchaser to inquire as to the intent and meaning of the instrument, then the bona fide purchaser is entitled to rely on the written record and is not charged with or bound by unstated meanings
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    or by secret or collateral agreements that add to or alter the written record.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Id. at *10. While the above quotation is in the context of ownership interests in real property, rather than the nature of consideration, or lack thereof, in connection with a grant deed, the same underlying principle is applicable: "third parties, including the trustee and the estate’s creditors, must be able to rely on the terms of recorded deed." Id. at *11. See also id. at *10 ("As a general rule, when any ambiguity is not evident from the face of the instrument (i.e., a "latent" ambiguity), the deed must be construed solely from an analysis of the plain meaning of the document itself, and extrinsic evidence is not admissible."); Laux v. Freed, 53 Cal. 2d. 512, 523 (Cal. 1960) ("[I]f the language of a deed is plain, certain and unambiguous, neither parol evidence nor surrounding facts and circumstances will be considered to add to, detract from, or vary its terms.").
    
    Regarding the insolvency requirement, Plaintiff first argues that given the absence of reasonably equivalent value, Debtor’s insolvency as a result of the transfer should be assumed; Plaintiff cites United States v. Mazzeo, 245 B.R. 435, 441 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). The Court declines to make such a presumption. The case cited by Plaintiff, and the related case law, deals with fraudulent transfer provisions under New York state law. See, e.g., Kim v. Ji Sung Yoo, 2017 WL 4382078 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (noting presumption and collecting cases). No such burden shifting framework, however, exists under the Bankruptcy Code. See 5 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 548.11[2] (16th ed. 2017) ("Under state law and the UFTA (and presumably the UVTA), a well- recognized exception permits the court to infer a proscribed financial state once the plaintiff has shown a lack of fair consideration or a lack of reasonably equivalent value. This shift should not apply to cases brought under section 548.") (footnotes omitted); see also In re Galbreath, 286 B.R. 185, 197 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2002) ("The burden for proving constructive fraud falls on the trustee who must show by a preponderance of the evidence that all requirements set out in § 548(a)(1)(B) have been met.")
    
    Plaintiff next argues that Debtor’s insolvency can be established through a review of the schedules. Essentially, Plaintiff argues that the schedules indicate that Debtor was insolvent as of the petition date, and that the Court can work backwards to conclude that Debtor was insolvent on the date of the transfer. As one bankruptcy court has stated:
    
    Since insolvency at a given point in time is often difficult to demonstrate by direct proof, courts permit the trustee to show that the debtor was insolvent at one point in time and then prove that the same condition existed at the time of
    2:00 PM
    CONT... Jose Antonio Hernandez Chapter 7
    the subject transfer. This method of proof has been labeled "retrojection," but
    it applies equally to situations in which the trustee starts at a point in time prior to the transfer. When the trustee chooses to use this method of proof it is essential that the trustee be able to show the absence of any substantial or radical changes in the assets or liabilities of the bankruptcy between the retrojection dates.
    
    In re R. Purbeck & Assocs., Ltd., 27 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1983) (footnotes and quotation omitted). Plaintiff argues that the schedules reflect that Debtor had no meaningful unexempt assets as of the petition date while much of Debtor’s unsecured debt was identified as having been incurred prior to the date of the transfer.
    Furthermore, Debtor’s statement of financial affairs does not disclose any significant transfers of property between the date of the subject transfer and the petition date.
    
    In Defendant’s opposition, she appears to contend that Debtor’s outstanding debt on the date of the subject transfer was $210,282 and that Debtor’s assets were valued at approximately $224,000. The Court notes that these assertions do not demonstrate solvency – they demonstrate insolvency as that term is defined in the Code. 11 U.S.C.
    § 101(32)(A)(ii) exempts from the solvency requirement property which may be exempt under § 522. The assets listed in Debtor’s schedules, and in Defendant’s opposition, all appear to be assets capable of being exempted under § 522, thereby rendering Defendant statutorily insolvent. Even ignoring that fact, however, Defendant’s opposition indicates that Debtor had $53,186 in equity in the property; transferring a 50% interest in the property would have rendered Debtor insolvent even before removing property which can be exempted. As a result, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has demonstrated there is no genuine dispute regarding Debtor’s insolvency on the date of the subject transfer.
  3. Recovery
    
    Plaintiff also seeks recovery of the subject property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550. 11
    U.S.C. § 550(a)(1) states:
    1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, to the extent that a transfer is avoided under section 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 553(b), or 724(a) of this title, the trustee may recover, for the benefit of the estate, the property transferred, or, if the court so orders, the value of such property, from –
      1. the initial transferee of such transfer or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Defendant opposes the requested recovery, although the legal basis for the opposition is less than clear. Defendant argues that "annulment of the Transfer would have the effect of returning the Property to a single ownership since Debtor was the sole owner. Therefore, recovery of the Transfer is unnecessary and provides no benefit to the estate." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 18, lines 15-17]. The Court’s interpretation of the Plaintiff’s request is that Plaintiff is requesting an order indicating that the Property has retained to single ownership (the bankruptcy estate). Therefore, it does not appear there is really any legal dispute here, semantical differences aside.
  4. Withdrawal of Admissions
  In light of the foregoing, the Court is inclined to deny Defendant’s motion to withdraw admissions as moot. The Court need not rely on admissions by default in resolving the instant motion for summary judgment.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion for summary judgment, avoiding the transfer as constructively fraudulent and permitting Trustee’s recovery of such transfer. Defendant’s motion to withdrawn admissions is DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint to Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer
  
  From: 9/7/16, 11/9/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/27/17, 11/29/17, 1/10/18
  
  Also #10 - #12
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  11:00 AM
  6:16-18182
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (Second Amended Adversary Complaint)
  
  From: 4/19/18 EH
  Docket 79
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/26/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On September 12, 2016, Douglas and Anne Goodman (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief.
  
  On November 11, 2016, Mark and Natasha Reynoso (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint seeking determination of the dischargeability of a debt pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) (the "Complaint"). Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that in 2015, they purchased real property located at 1656 West Lisbon Street in Upland, CA (the "Property") from the Debtors, and that a sale was consummated on the misrepresentations of the Debtors’ agent, Theresa Mann, that the Property was 3,231 square feet while Plaintiffs assert that the Property is actually 2,713 square feet (or a difference of 518 square feet). Plaintiffs also assert that they were led to believe that a water leak in the upstairs bathroom had been repaired. Plaintiffs allege that the Debtors knew or should have known that their agent was making false and misleading representations to Plaintiffs.
  
  On February 3, 2017, the Court entered an order granting Defendants first motion to dismiss the Complaint, with leave to amend. An First Amended Complaint (the "FAC") was filed on April 19, 2017. The Court denied Defendants’ second motion to dismiss at a hearing on , May 4, 2017. On June 5, 2017, the Defendants filed their Answer to the FAC ("Answer").
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Chapter 13
  On March 9, 2018, the Defendants moved to dismiss the FAC ("Motion"). The hearing was initially set for April 19, 2018, but was continued to April 26, 2018, on the Court’s own motion, by order entered April 11, 2018. The deadline for opposition based on the initially scheduled hearing was April 5, 2018. At the time that the Court continued the hearing, Plaintiffs had not filed any opposition to the Motion and their deadline to oppose had lapsed. Subsequent to the Court continuing the hearing, the Plaintiffs late-filed their opposition on April 12, 2018 ("Opposition"), for the April 19, 2018, hearing. On April 20, 2018, the Defendants filed a reply primarily objecting to the timeliness of the Opposition ("Reply").
  
  DISCUSSION
  As a threshold matter, the Motion seeks relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
  However, given that the Defendants have filed an Answer to the FAC, the Court shall construe the Motion as a motion under Rule 12(c), a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
  
  Civil Rule 12(c) standard
  "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings." Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). "Judgment on the pleadings is properly granted when, taking all allegations in the pleading as true, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Knappenberger v. City of Phx., 566 F.3d 936, 939 (9th Cir.2009) (quoting Merchants Home Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Frank B. Hall & Co., 50 F.3d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir.1995)).
  
  On a Rule 12(c) motion, the court must accept as true all the material facts alleged in the complaint and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non- moving party. Fleming v. Pickard, 581 F.3d 922, 925 (9th Cir.2009). In ruling on a Rule 12(c) motion, the court may not consider extrinsic evidence unless the motion is converted into a Rule 56 summary judgment. Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1550 (9th Cir.1989) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c); Bonilla v. Oakland Scavenger Co., 697 F.2d 1297, 1301 (9th Cir.1982)). However, a court may consider facts that are contained in materials of which the court may take judicial notice when considering a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Heliotrope Gen., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 189 F.3d 971, 981 n. 18 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Barron v. Reich, 13 F.3d 1370, 1377 (9th Cir.1994)).
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  The crux of Defendants’ argument for dismissal of the FAC is that Plaintiffs
  
  Chapter 13
  have not set forth the basis for a money judgment under state law. Specifically, the Motion provides, in pertinent part, that
  
  Plaintiffs have requested a money judgment in their amended complaint, they do not appear to have provided any legal basis for their request—i.e. there is no state law basis to enter a money judgment. 11
  U.S.C. §523(a)(2) is not a basis to enter a money judgment; the plain language of the statute provides that it is a basis for finding a debt to be nondischargeable. If the Plaintiffs want a money judgment, they need to provide a non-bankruptcy law basis for their request. They have not done so here.
  
  Motion at ¶6.
  
  The Ninth Circuit has held that a bankruptcy court may enter a monetary judgment on a disputed state law fraud claim in the course of determining that the debt is nondischargeable. Cowen v. Kennedy (In re Kennedy), 108 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir.1997). Shawn Deitz v. Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford (In re Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford), 469 B.R. 11, 21 (9th Cir. BAP 2012), aff'd, 760 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2014).
  Here, although the Complaint is not explicit regarding the state law causes of action at issue, it appears implicit in the allegations that the Plaintiffs seek a monetary judgment as to a fraud or misrepresentation claim. Nonetheless, Plaintiffs should not have to guess at the state law basis of the debt for a money judgment.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion dismissing the FAC with leave to amend, in order to provide the Plaintiffs with an opportunity to set forth the specific bases for monetary damages under state law such that the litigation can proceed.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Chapter 13
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Defendant(s):
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
  Jose Pastora Represented By
  Andrew L Leff
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Movant(s):
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
  Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se
  Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se
  Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Edward T Weber
  
  Chapter 13
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-14501
  
  Julie Lynn Salazar
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01213 Winegardner Masonry, Inc. v. Salazar
  
  #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01213. Complaint by Winegardner Masonry, Inc. against Julie Lynn Salazar. fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))
  Holding Date
  
  MAIN CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
  
  From: 12/21/18, 3/5/18, 4/19/18 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER DISMISSING ADVERSARY ENTERED 4/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Defendant(s):
  Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By
  Joseph C Markowitz
  Plaintiff(s):
  Winegardner Masonry, Inc. Represented By William A Smelko
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Julie Lynn Salazar
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:18-01050 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certifica v. FMJM RWL III
  
  #3.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Also #4
  EH
  
  Docket 3
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/10/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Defendant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Movant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Plaintiff(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By
  Kristin A Zilberstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:18-01050 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certifica v. FMJM RWL III
  
  #4.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01050. Complaint by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certificate Trustee on Behalf of Bosco Credit II Trust Series 2010-1 against FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1.
  Kristin) Also #3 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/10/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Defendant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Plaintiff(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By
  Kristin A Zilberstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-14501
  
  Julie Lynn Salazar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Application for Compensation of Attorney for Debtor for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case for Jenny L Doling, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 6/20/2017 to 3/9/2018, Fee: $12671.25, Expenses: $0.
  
  CASE DISMISSED 3/9/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 62
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Movant(s):
  Julie Lynn Salazar Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Julie Lynn Salazar Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:16-20219
  
  Robert Ibay Orina and Emmyruth Amizola Orina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: HEARING SET IN ERROR
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Robert Ibay Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Emmyruth Amizola Orina Represented By
  Timothy L McCandless
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-16974
  
  Thomas Milton Bell and Guadalupe Bell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant Respiratory Care Board of California
  
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/26/2018
  The Claim at issue was withdrawn on April 12, 2018. The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Objection as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Thomas Milton Bell Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Guadalupe Bell Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Movant(s):
  Thomas Milton Bell Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Guadalupe Bell Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-18792
  
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  From: 11/30/17, 12/21/17, 1/25/18, 3/1/18, 3/22/18, 4/19/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-13809
  
  Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/29/18
  Also #10 EH
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-13809
  
  Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  Also #9 EH
  Docket 35
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  Movant(s):
  Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed Craig K Streed
  Miriam L Castaneda Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda
  Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10136
  
  Samuel Garcia and Claudia Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18, 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Samuel Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Claudia Garcia Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10454
  
  Scott Lawrence and Anita D Lawrence
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 3/22/18, 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Scott Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Anita D Lawrence Represented By Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10825
  
  William Thomas Pedrino and Terri Lyn Pedrino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/12/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  William Thomas Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Terri Lyn Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10871
  
  Francisco Javier Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco Javier Martinez Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10873
  
  Evan Todd Flynn and Elizabeth Flynn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/12/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Evan Todd Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10900
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 CONT Motion for Setting Property Value From: 4/19/18
  Also #17 EH
  Docket 22
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  04/26/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On February 5, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino (collectively, the "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the Debtors’ estate is a 2013 Jeep Wrangler (the "Jeep") which is subject to the security interest of Santander Consumer USA Inc. ("Santander"). On February 21, 2018, Santander filed Proof of Claim No. 2 asserting a secured claim in the amount of $25,575 with an unsecured claim for $5,854.50, for a total claim of
  $31,429.50.
  
  On March 15, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion for Setting Property Value (the "Motion"). The Motion was properly served and no opposition or response has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Section 506(a) ‘operates to bifurcate [an under] secured creditor's allowed claim into secured and unsecured interests based upon the bankruptcy court's
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  
  Chapter 13
  valuation of the secured property. 11 U.S.C. § 506; In re 1441 Veteran Street Co., 144 F.3d 1288, 1291 (9th Cir.1998); Shook v. CBIC (In re Shook), 278 B.R. 815, 822 (9th
  Cir. BAP 2002).
  
  Here, the Debtors have provided evidence asserting, based on the NADA Guide estimate of value, that the Jeep has a current fair market value of $19,425. Based on the Debtor’s valuation, Santander’s secured claim should be reduced to
  $19,425 with an unsecured claim in the amount of $12,004.50.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Based on the foregoing, including Santander’s failure to file opposition or response, which the Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion valuing the Jeep at $19,425 and bifurcating the claims of Santander as set forth above.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark
  Movant(s):
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark Michael E Clark
  Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  Michael E Clark Michael E Clark Michael E Clark
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10900
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  Also #16 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10915
  
  Juana Santiago
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juana Santiago Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10957
  
  Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson Represented By
  Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10958
  
  Jose Reyes Agredano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Reyes Agredano Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10978
  
  Veronica Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Veronica Hernandez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11027
  
  Moises Martinez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Moises Martinez Represented By
  Inez Tinoco-Vaca
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11078
  
  Danny Howard Weeks
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Danny Howard Weeks Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11080
  
  Edgardo Aranda and Kelley Aranda
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kelley Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11081
  
  Stephen Daniel Payan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Stephen Daniel Payan Represented By Paul J Kurtzhall
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11082
  
  Jaqueline Lee Stephens
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jaqueline Lee Stephens Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11089
  
  Ruben Munoz Tovar and Sandra Isabel Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ruben Munoz Tovar Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sandra Isabel Garcia Represented By Sunita N Sood
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11092
  
  David E Fisher
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David E Fisher Represented By Scott Kosner
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11106
  
  David L Knapp
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  David L Knapp Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11109
  
  Ernesto J Prodigalidad
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ernesto J Prodigalidad Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11116
  
  Albertina Do Carmo Silva
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Albertina Do Carmo Silva Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11126
  
  Jose Luis Ortiz Landazuri
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Luis Ortiz Landazuri Represented By
  Dennis A Rasmussen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11128
  
  Gilbert D Olivares
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gilbert D Olivares Represented By Scott Kosner
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11134
  
  Yanina Galvan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Yanina Galvan Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11205
  
  Kimberly Lezette Mizera
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Kimberly Lezette Mizera Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11212
  
  Diana J Everett
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #37 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11212
  
  Diana J Everett
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #37.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ANY AND ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY
  
  MOVANT: DIANA J. EVERETT
  
  From: 3/6/18, 3/12/18 Also #36
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  03/06/2018
  
  The Debtor indicates that the case was dismissed for two reasons: (1) the Debtor’s disability income decreased, and (2) the Debtor’s daughter was in a serious accident in November 2017 and the Debtor has been paying her medical and legal fees associated with the accident.
  
  The Debtor’s explanation for the dismissal of the prior case is sufficiently detailed. However, the Motion does not address whether there has been a change in the financial or personal affairs of the Debtor since January 2018 (when the case was dismissed) such that the Debtor is likely to be able to complete her plan going forward. In particular, there is no indication that the medical emergency which resulted in dismissal of the Debtor’s prior case has ended. Additionally, the Debtor now indicates that she is supporting her unemployed domestic partner. The Debtor’s disposable income has decreased from $4,197.72 in her prior case to $704.72 in the current case.
  
  Separately, the Court notes that the Notice of Motion did not specify the identities of the Debtor’s secured creditors as required by the Court’s form motion. As such, notice
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Diana J Everett
  
  Chapter 13
  for the secured creditors is improper.
  For these reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Diana J Everett Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11213
  
  Danilo DeLaCruz, Jr. and Maria Russiel DeLaCruz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Danilo DeLaCruz Jr. Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Russiel DeLaCruz Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11214
  
  Robert VanSurksum
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/6/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Robert VanSurksum Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11217
  
  Mardie Lois Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  EH
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mardie Lois Washington Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11319
  
  Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11346
  
  Jeffrey R Powell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jeffrey R Powell Represented By David L Nelson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11358
  
  Norma Hermosillo Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/12/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Norma Hermosillo Hernandez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11363
  
  John Louis Baumann and Tracey Leigh Baumann
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  John Louis Baumann Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tracey Leigh Baumann Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11403
  
  Dony M Portillo and Raquel A Portillo
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #45.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Dony M Portillo Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Raquel A Portillo Represented By Paul Y Lee Andrea Liddick
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11406
  
  Karen Ann Staff
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #46.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Karen Ann Staff Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11407
  
  Rushelyn Napalan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #47.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rushelyn Napalan Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11416
  
  Darlene J. Wadler
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Darlene J. Wadler Represented By Michael Jay Berger
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11432
  
  Armando Guzman
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Armando Guzman Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11529
  
  Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #50.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Principal Residence with BANK OF AMERICA NA SUCCESSOR TO COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS
  
  EH
  
  Docket 17
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/26/2018
  Summary of the Motion:
  Notice: Improper
  Opposition: None
  Address: 6713 Pierce Ct, Chino, CA 91710
  First trust deed: $476,934.41 with HSBC Bank USA (mortgage statement dated 01/01/2018)
  Second trust deed (to be avoided): $23,046.47 with Bank of America NA (statement dated 01/01/2018)
  Fair market value (per debtor declaration): $430,000
  
  TENTATIVE
  The electronically filed Motion contains a proof of service ("POS") with blank dates and no service information. The POS is insufficient to establish proper service as filed. Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to May 24, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for Movant to file and serve notice of the continued hearing pursuant to FRBP 7004.
  
  On correcting the service issue as indicated, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael A Losoya Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya
  Julie J Villalobos
  
  Chapter 13
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Movant(s):
  Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12177
  
  Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #51.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 9 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14950 Deerfield Victorville, CA 92394 with Declarations and Proof of Service. filed by Debtor Rodolfo Aguiar, Joint Debtor Irma D Aguiar) with declaration and proof of service
  
  MOVANT: RODOLFO AGUIAR AND IRMA D AGUIAR
  
  From: 4/10/18, 4/19/18 EH
  Docket 12
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVANCED TO 4/18/18 AT 1:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  TENTATIVE RULING:
  
  4/20/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for improper service. The Court notes that the motion purports to be set on regular notice, but this motion is actually being heard on shortened notice. As a result, the motion leaves notified parties with minimal time to file an objection. Furthermore, secured creditors were not served pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004 as required by this Court’s procedures.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Irma D Aguiar Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
  
  Alla Tenina
  
  Chapter 13
  Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
  Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12355
  
  Marc Burns
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #52.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real property located at 6712 Bear Canyon Road, Mt. Baldy, CA 91759
  
  MOVANT: MARC BURNS
  
  From: 4/10/18, 4/19/18 EH
  Docket 8
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVANCED TO 4/18/18 AT 1:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  TENTATIVE RULING:
  
  4/20/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. The Court notes that secured creditors were not served pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004 as required by this Court’s procedures.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marc Burns Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Movant(s):
  Marc Burns Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-12915
  
  Robb Lee Armstrong and Silvia Armstrong
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 52
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Robb Lee Armstrong Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Silvia Armstrong Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-21894
  
  Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #54.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 159
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-23615
  
  Richard Joseph Adams, Sr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #55.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Material Default) EH
  Docket 157
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Richard Joseph Adams Sr. Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Movant(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-12975
  
  Deborah Lynn Gordon
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 68
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Deborah Lynn Gordon Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-22236
  
  Gustavo Brito
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #57.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Make Plan Payments From: 3/22/18, 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 71
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  04/26/2018
  The hearing on the Motion was continued for proper service on the Debtor. A Notice of Continued Hearing correcting the prior service error was filed on March 26, 2018, and the Debtor has failed to file any opposition or response which the Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion under LBR 9013-1(h). Based on the prior tentative ruling, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and dismiss the case for non-payment of post-petition tax liabilities.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order attaching both of this Court's tentative rulings as an exhibit.
  
  3/22/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  11:01 AM
  CONT...
  
  Gustavo Brito
  
  Chapter 13
  On September 30, 2014, Gustavo Brito ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On November 20, 2014, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. The mandatory Chapter 13 form plan contains a provision (Section V.H) which states: "The Debtor will pay timely all postconfirmation tax liabilities directly to the appropriate taxing authorities as they become due."
  
  Since confirmation the Trustee has filed three motions to dismiss, all of which were ultimately resolved. Additionally, the Chapter 13 plan has been modified once. On February 23, 2018, the California Department of Tax & Fee Administration ("CDTFA") filed a motion to dismiss or convert to Chapter 7 on the basis that Debtors had not paid their postconfirmation taxes. The Court notes that the motion was served on Debtors’ attorney, but was not served on Debtors.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  The Court will continue the matter for CDTFA to serve the motion on Debtors.
  
  Regarding the merits, the Court notes that 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c)(6) provides for dismissal or conversion for cause, which is defined to include "material default by the debtor with respect to a term of a confirmed plan." Here, the Court notes that Debtors’ confirmed plan provided that all postconfirmation tax liabilities were to be timely paid. CDTFA has provided evidence that Debtor has accrued $19,888.54 in post- petition tax liabilities which constitutes a material default satisfying § 1307(c)(6).
  Because Debtors do not appear to have meaningful unencumbered, unexempt assets, this Court would be inclined to dismiss the case rather than convert it to Chapter 7.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter to April 19, 2018 at 12:30 p.m. for
  11:01 AM
  CONT...
  
  Gustavo Brito
  
  Chapter 13
  proper service of the motion on Debtors.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gustavo Brito Represented By Freddie V Vega
  Movant(s):
  California Department of Tax and Represented By
  Suman Mathews
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-14835
  
  Bennea Cynthia Travis
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #58.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 3/22/18, 4/12/18
  EH
  
  Docket 71
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bennea Cynthia Travis Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-16873
  
  Brenda Morgan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #59.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 51
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Brenda Morgan Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-22294
  
  Jonathan William Nicastro
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #60.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 105
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jonathan William Nicastro Represented By
  Rabin J Pournazarian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-17902
  
  Patricia Daniels
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 40
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/11/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Patricia Daniels Represented By Benjamin R Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-17911
  
  Elizabeth T Baker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #62.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 121
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elizabeth T Baker Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-18082
  
  Joseph John Vargas and Lydia Vargas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #63.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 67
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Joseph John Vargas Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lydia Vargas Represented By
  Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-20329
  
  Gabriel Cruz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #64.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 52
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gabriel Cruz Represented By
  Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-21234
  
  Frank A Horzen and Barbara A Horzen
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #65.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/12/18
  EH
  
  Docket 73
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Frank A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Barbara A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11566
  
  Jose A. Gonzales, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #66.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/19
  EH
  
  Docket 40
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose A. Gonzales Jr. Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-12397
  
  Robert Nelson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #67.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 21
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/16/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Robert Nelson Represented By David L Nelson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-16024
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #68.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Stacy N Reagor Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-18366
  
  Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #69.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 34
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19281
  
  Anthony J McPike
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 38
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anthony J McPike Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19432
  
  Ryan Eddie Hinojosa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #71.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 35
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ryan Eddie Hinojosa Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19785
  
  Evonne Marie Woodard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #72.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 28
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Evonne Marie Woodard Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19787
  
  Gloria Hayslet
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #73.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gloria Hayslet Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19890
  
  Katrina Renee McDowell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #74.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 4/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FLD 4/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Katrina Renee McDowell Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  
  Monday, April 30, 2018
  Hearing Room
  303
  
  11:00 AM
  6:18-13057
  
  Desert Ice Castle, LLC
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Trustees Emergency Motion For Order Abandoning The Estates Interest In The Current Operations Of Desert Ice Castle Ice Skating Rink
  
  EH
  
  Docket 16
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  10:00 AM
  6:14-16717
  Andrea Sindy Pozgaj
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8436 Limestone Dr, Riverside, CA 92504
  
  MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB
  
  EH
  
  Docket 49
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Andrea Sindy Pozgaj Represented By Joel M Feinstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-10257
  
  Cecilia Orozco and Sergio Orozco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 13330 Kyle Dr. Moreno Valley, CA 92553
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 41
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Cecilia Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sergio Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14868
  
  Richard M. Orellano, II and Tifany Orellano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40748 Pocona Place, Murrieta, California 92562
  
  MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 55
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Richard M. Orellano II Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tifany Orellano Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15227
  
  John E Neilsen, Sr and Kathy A Neilsen
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 41880 Lakefront Drive, Aguanga, California 92536
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 48
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  John E Neilsen Sr Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kathy A Neilsen Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-20145
  
  Willie J Bryant
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 CONT Motion for Relief from Stay re 2 2015 Peterbilt 389-series Tractors 131" 6x4
  
  MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
  
  From: 3/20/18, 4/17/18 EH
  Docket 9
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Willie J Bryant Represented By Ronald L Brownson
  Movant(s):
  BMO Harris Bank N.A. Represented By Deborah S Cochran
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10959
  
  Victor Cervantes, Jr.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 HONDA ACCORD, VIN: 1HGC R2F5 1HA2 60836
  
  MOVANT: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  1. and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Victor Cervantes Jr. Represented By Christopher Hewitt
    Trustee(s):
    John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:18-10939
    
    Vance Zachary Johnson
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #7.00 Motion to Determine Character of Granowitz Funds as Separate Property of the Non-Debtor Spouse Under Pre-Petition State Court Order
    
    EH
    
    Docket 46
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/1/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On February 7, 2018, Vance Johnson ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On February 27, 2018, the Court authorized Debtor’s employment of Goe & Forsythe, LLP as general bankruptcy counsel as well as the employment of a real estate broker. On March 27, 2018, the Court authorized the employment of Christopher Abernathy as special counsel. On April 16, 2018, the Court authorized Debtor’s employment of a CPA.
    
    On April 5, 2018, Joana Johnson ("Joana") filed a "motion to determine character of Granowitz funds as separate property of the non-debtor spouse under pre-petition state court order." Through the motion, Joana requests that the Court issue an order characterizing the Granowitz funds as her separate property (and not property of the bankruptcy estate) and require that the funds be turned over from Debtor’s client trust fund to Joana’s client trust fund. On April 17, 2018, Debtor filed his opposition.
    
    DISCUSSION
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Vance Zachary Johnson
    
    Chapter 11
    FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001 states, in pertinent part:
    
    An adversary proceeding is governed by the rules of this Part VII. The following are adversary proceedings:
    1. a proceeding to recover money or property, other than a proceeding to compel the debtor to deliver property to the trustee, or a proceeding under § 554(b) or
      § 725 of the Code, Rule 2017, or Rule 6002;
    2. a proceeding to determine the validity, priority, or extent of a lien or other interest in property, but not a proceeding under Rule 3012 or Rule 4003(d); . . .
  (9) a proceeding to obtain a declaratory judgment relating to any of the foregoing
  
  Debtor argues that Joana’s request for a determination that the Granowitz funds are her separate property fits within the scope of Rule 7001(2). Debtor further argues that Joana’s request that the funds be turned over fits within the scope of Rule 7001(1).
  
  The Court agrees with Debtor. While the requirement of an adversary proceeding may be waivable in certain circumstances, here Debtor has opposed the requested relief and raised the procedural defect. See, e.g., In re Fadel, 492 B.R. 1, 10 n.5 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2013) (resolving a dispute regarding property interests in alleged community property, but noting that neither party had raised the requirement of an adversary proceeding imposed by Rule 7001(2)). Plainly, Joana’s motion requests that the Court determine, or issue a declaratory "judgment" regarding, the extent of the parties’ respective interest in the property at issue, the Granowitz funds. Therefore, the request requires an adversary proceeding pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001.
  
  Joana’s reply asserts two separate grounds for why an adversary proceeding is not required here. First, Joana argues that Debtor has previously waived the requirement of an adversary proceeding. In so asserting, Joana states that "the Pre-Petition State
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  Court Stipulation provides that the Granowitz Funds ‘shall be held or refunded pending further bankruptcy court approval.’ [Doc. p. 2, lns. 10-12)." This argument is unclear. The document referenced was not filed pre-petition (it was executed February 22, 2018) and the document provides for Granowitz (Joana’s counsel) to transfer the funds to the client trust account for Debtor’s counsel. This simply does not constitute a waiver of the right to an adversary proceeding if Joana seeks a subsequent re- transfer of the funds, and therefore the Court rejects this argument as lacking merit.
  
  Joana also essentially argues that the requirement of an adversary proceeding can essentially be disregarded when ignoring such a requirement would be harmless; Joana cites a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel case in support of her assertion. In re Munoz, however, is identifying an appellate standard, i.e. failure to proceed by means of adversary proceeding does not require reversal if such failure is harmless error. 287
  B.R. 546, 551 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2002). The case also states that "[i]t is error to circumvent the requirement of an adversary proceeding by using a ‘contested matter’ motion under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9014." Id. The Court rejects Joana’s request, which essentially amounts to a request to use a deferential appellate standard of review at the trial court level.
  
  The Court need not reach Joana’s request for turnover of the Granowitz funds, because such request is dependent on obtaining an order characterizing the funds as Joana’s separate property.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion without prejudice to filing an adversary proceeding.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  11:00 AM
  6:15-19998
  
  Jack C Pryor
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 322
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  05/02/2018
  
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees:
  $ 13,520.36
  Trustee Expenses:
  $ 793.07
  Attorney Fees:
  $36,610.21
  Attorney Costs:
  $5,047.77
  Accountant Fees:
  $1,737.91
  Accountant Costs:
  $310
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jack C Pryor Represented By
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Jack C Pryor
  
  Trent Thompson
  
  Chapter 7
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe Brandon J Iskander
  11:00 AM
  6:16-17802
  
  Armon Randolph Sharp
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 70
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/02/2018
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees:
  $ 2,350
  Trustee Expenses:
  $ 48.84
  Attorney Fees:
  $10,000
  Attorney Costs:
  $0
  Accountant Fees:
  $1,000 (per flat fee order entered 12/14/17)
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Armon Randolph Sharp
  
  Chapter 7
  Armon Randolph Sharp Represented By Daniel King
  Raymond W Stockstill
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung
  2:00 PM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 1/31/18, 4/11/18
  EH
  
  Docket 74
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/30/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10249
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01038 Jones v. US Bank National Association et al
  
  #4.00 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Adversary Complaint Also #5
  EH
  
  Docket 13
  
  Tentative Ruling: 05/02/2018 BACKGROUND
  On November 22, 2017, Derick Jones ("Debtor") filed his first bankruptcy petition (the "First Case"). The First Case was dismissed on January 5, 2018, for failure to file information. On January 12, 2018, the Debtor filed his second bankruptcy petition (the "Second Case"). The chapter 7 trustee is Karl Anderson ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the Debtor’s estate is an alleged tenancy interest in certain real property located at 3187 Pinehurst Drive in Corona, CA (the "Property").
  
  On February 12, 2018, the Debtor filed his Complaint for Violation of the Automatic Stay ("Complaint") against U.S. Bank, NA (the "Bank"). In response, the Bank filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint on March 13, 2018. On March 28, 2018, the Debtor filed a First Amended Complaint alleging (1) violation of the automatic stay, (2) lack of standing for Bank to foreclose, and (3) unjust enrichment (the "FAC"). On April 5, 2018, the Bank filed its Motion to Dismiss the FAC (the "Motion"). Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition was filed.
  
  On April 24, 2018, the Debtor filed a Notice of Non-Receipt of Motion to Dismiss the FAC ("Notice").
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  DISCUSSION
  Under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), made applicable in adversary proceedings through Rule 7012, a bankruptcy court may dismiss a complaint if it fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." In reviewing a Civil Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the trial court must accept as true all facts alleged in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir.
  2001). However, the trial court need not accept as true conclusory allegations in a complaint or legal characterizations cast in the form of factual allegations. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555–56, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007);
  Hartman v. Gilead Scis., Inc. (In re Gilead Scis. Sec. Litig.), 536 F.3d 1049, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).
  
  To avoid dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must aver in the complaint "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173
  L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). It is axiomatic that a claim cannot be plausible when it has no legal basis. A dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) may be based either on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or on the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory. Johnson
  v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008).
  The court may rely on judicially noticed facts to establish that an adversary complaint does not state a claim for relief. See Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp., 669 F.3d 1005, 1016 n. 9 (9th Cir.2012). And, it may consider the existence and content of documents referenced in the complaint when authenticity is uncontested and the plaintiff necessarily relied upon such documents in his complaint. See United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir.2003); Lee v. City of L.A., 250 F.3d 668, 688 (9th Cir.2001).
  Request for Judicial Notice
  As a threshold matter, the Court takes judicial notice of the documents filed in support of the Motion as Docket No. 14.
  
  Service
  Debtor filed his Notice asserting that he did not receive a copy of the Motion. The Debtor’s Notice, however, is not signed under penalty of perjury. In contrast, the Bank has filed a proof of service signed under penalty of perjury which indicates that the Debtor was properly served on the Debtor at his address of record. Based on the Bank’s proof of service, the Court concludes that service was proper and Debtor filed
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  to file any opposition or response to the Motion.
  
  Violation of the Automatic Stay
  On October 27, 2017, the Superior Court in the UD Action entered Judgment in favor of the Bank and against the Debtor ("Judgment"). (FAC, pg. 2, ln. 6-7, and ¶ 9). On February 7, 2018, during the pendency of the Debtor’s Second Case, the Riverside County Sheriff effectuated a lock-out of the Debtor.
  
  The Bank argues that the lock-out was not a violation of the automatic stay because under California law, the Debtor no longer had any equitable or legal interest in the Property. For this reason, Bank argues that the first claim for relief must be dismissed. The Bank argues, in pertinent part, that
  
  California law contains very specific provisions that address whether an individual holds any legal or equitable interest in a property that was sold via a non-judicial foreclosure. Under California law, once a non- judicial foreclosure sale has occurred, the individual debtor’s rights in the foreclosed property are terminated. In re Onouli-Kona Land Co., (9th Cir. 1988) 846 F.2d. 1170. Specifically, the Courts have held that the completion of a foreclosure sale is effective upon the fall of auctioneer’s hammer. Ballengee v. Sadlier (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 1; See also Cal. Civ. Code § 2924 (h) which provides that once the bidding is open, each bid constitutes "an irrevocable offer." Acceptance of the bid signals "the completion of the sale," constitutes the final adjudication of the rights of the borrower/debtor (Nguyen v. Calhoun (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 428, 440-441), and precludes the borrower/debtor from exercising any redemption or ownership rights in the foreclosed property (Ballengee v. Sadlier (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 1, at p. 5; Jones v. Wagner (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 466).
  Motion at 7.
  
  In support of its arguments, the Bank has provided a copy of the Trustee’s
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  Deed Upon Sale which was recorded subsequent to the foreclosure on December 5, 2016. (RJN, Ex. 8). The Bank has also provided copies of the UD Minute Order awarding possession of the subject property and the Writ of Possession specifically entered in favor of Bank and against the Debtor, both were issued prior to the filing of the First Case. (RJN, Ex.’s 10 and 11).
  
  In In re Perl, the Ninth Circuit determined that under California law, entry of judgment and a writ of possession following unlawful detainer proceedings extinguishes all other legal and equitable possessory interests in the real property at issue. Eden Place, LLC v. Sholem Perl (In re Perl), 811 F.3d 1120, 1128 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Perl v. Eden Place, LLC, 137 S. Ct. 39, 196 L. Ed. 2d 27 (2016). Here, Judgment and a Writ of Possession were entered in favor of Bank prepetition. Thus, any legal or equitable rights that Debtor may have possessed were effectively extinguished prior to the filing of the First Case and as such, the FAC fails to allege facts to support a claim for violation of the automatic stay because the Debtor retained no interest in the Property to be protected by automatic stay. Thus, the First Claim for Relief must be dismissed. Relatedly, the Debtor’s claims regarding standing and unjust enrichment constitute a collateral attack on the Unlawful Detainer Judgment of the State Court. This Court finds that permitting the Debtor’s litigation to continue would constitute a violation of the Rooker–Feldman doctrine. The Rooker- Feldman doctrine is confined to cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and inviting district court review and rejection of those judgments. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 125 S. Ct. 1517, 1521–22 (2005). In this case, the Debtor is plainly dissatisfied with the Judgment of the State Court and now seeks to have this Court invalidate its Judgment.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  Based on the foregoing analysis, in addition to the Debtor’s failure to file opposition to the Motion which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion, and based also on the arguments of Bank, which are well-taken, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and DISMISS the FAC in its entirety, with prejudice.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  US Bank National Association Pro Se
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  Plaintiff(s):
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10249
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01038 Jones v. US Bank National Association et al
  
  #5.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01038. Complaint by Derick Jones against US Bank National Association . (Fee Not Required).
  Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) From: 4/25/18
  Also #4 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  US Bank National Association Pro Se
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Nichole Glowin
  Plaintiff(s):
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:13-12182
  
  Stacey Jo West
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: Property known as 17794 Lemon St, Hesperia CA 92345
  
  MOVANT: DITECH FINANCIAL LLC
  
  From: 4/24/18 EH
  Docket 164
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Based on the Court's review of the evidence presented by the parties, it appears Debtor is still delinquent by approximately $480.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Stacey Jo West Represented By Arnold H Wuhrman
  Movant(s):
  DITECH FINANCIAL LLC Represented By Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:14-10539
  
  Joseph Lane Hilliard and Christine Vivian Hilliard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2855 Boise Creek Place, Ontario, CA 91761
  
  MOVANT: WILMINTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB dba CHRISTIANA TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 58
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/08/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under
  ¶¶ 3 and 12 of the prayer for relief.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Joseph Lane Hilliard Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Christine Vivian Hilliard Represented By Ronald W Ask
  Movant(s):
  Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
  Tyneia Merritt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Joseph Lane Hilliard and Christine Vivian Hilliard
  Nancy L Lee
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-19804
  
  Juan M Madueno Carrizoza
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8738 Redondo Avenue, Hesperia, CA 92344
  
  MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 61
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/30/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Juan M Madueno Carrizoza Represented By
    James Geoffrey Beirne
    Movant(s):
    Nationstar Mortgage LLC Represented By Megan E Lees Nancy L Lee
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:16-13715
    
    Timothy A Kiley and Ellen Eastwood
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 437 Darfo Drive, Crestline, California 92325
    
    MOVANT: U.S. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 38
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3. DENY request for APO as moot.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Timothy A Kiley Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Ellen Eastwood Represented By
    M Wayne Tucker
    Movant(s):
    U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
    Megan E Lees Armin M Kolenovic
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Timothy A Kiley and Ellen Eastwood
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-11658
    
    Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #5.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420
    
    MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    From: 2/6/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18 EH
    Docket 31
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    2/6/2018
    
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
    § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it is unclear if effective service was made upon "borrower" Anthony Elie. Furthermore, because Anthony Elie is not a party to the note he is not a co-debtor within the meaning of the statute.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
    Movant(s):
    U.S. Bank National Association Represented By
    Armin M Kolenovic
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-13608
    
    Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8893 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
    
    MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    From: 2/13/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18 EH
    
    Docket 23
    *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 4/11/18
    Tentative Ruling:
    02/13/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
    
    Subject to discussions re adequate protection, the Court’s tentative is to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay, GRANT authority to offer loan workout options pursuant to ¶3 of prayer for relief and GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Warren Alan Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Kelly Suzanne Hall Represented By
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Movant(s):
    
    Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall
    Lionel E Giron
    
    Chapter 13
    U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
    Armin M Kolenovic
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-17241
    
    Corinthia A. Williams
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1995 San Gabriel St, San Bernardino, CA 92404-4859
    
    MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
    
    EH
    
    Docket 53
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
    Parties to update Court regarding status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
    Movant(s):
    WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Jonetta A Graves Darshana Shah Armin M Kolenovic
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-17979
    
    Dolphe Stuart Clark and Linda Joyce Clark
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 33926 Vinca Lane, Murrieta, California 92563
    
    MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 22
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2017
    Service: Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Dolphe Stuart Clark Represented By
    Ethan Kiwhan Chin
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Linda Joyce Clark Represented By
    Ethan Kiwhan Chin
    Movant(s):
    U.S. Bank National Association, not Represented By
    Erin M McCartney
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Dolphe Stuart Clark and Linda Joyce Clark
    
    Chapter 7
    John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-18039
    
    Tony Lopez, Sr and Nelida Aguilar
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Subaru Impreza sedan
    
    MOVANT: VENTURA COUNTY CREDIT UNION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 21
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request under § 362(d)(2) for lack of evidence to support such finding.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Tony Lopez Sr Represented By Edgar P Lombera
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Nelida Aguilar Represented By Edgar P Lombera
    Movant(s):
    Ventura County Credit Union Represented By Ann G. Lee
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Tony Lopez, Sr and Nelida Aguilar
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-18366
    
    Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 38239 Mulligan Drive, Beaumont, CA 92223
    
    MOVANT: PACIFIC UNION FINANCIAL LLC
    
    EH
    
    Docket 38
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 3, 6 and 12.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill Represented By Christopher J Langley
    Movant(s):
    Pacific Union Financial, LLC Represented By Darlene C Vigil
    Trustee(s):
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:17-20129
    
    Carlos V Sosa Ramirez and Xochitl O Sosa
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8580 Candlewood St, Chino, CA 91708
    
    MOVANT: SETERUS INC
    
    EH
    
    Docket 24
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service is Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1), (d)(2) and (d)(4). Court finds that bankruptcy case was part of a scheme to hinder, delay and defraud creditors based on multiple bankruptcy filings and unauthorized transfers affecting this property.
    GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3 and GRANTED as to annulment retroactive to the petition date.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Carlos V Sosa Ramirez Represented By Qais Zafari
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Xochitl O Sosa Represented By
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Movant(s):
    
    Carlos V Sosa Ramirez and Xochitl O Sosa
    Qais Zafari
    
    Chapter 7
    Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By James F Lewin
    Trustee(s):
    Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-10357
    
    Isaias Solano
    
    Chapter 13
    
    #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8287 Thoroughbred St., Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701
    
    MOVANT: PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    
    EH
    
    Docket 33
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
    
    Debtor asserts he has made the necessary payments through the chapter 13 trustee’s office. The order confirming chapter 13 plan explicitly provides for conduit payments and the Debtor has provided evidence that a cashier’s check was made out to the chapter 13 trustee on April 16, 2018. Based on the Debtor’s evidence, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.
    
    However, the Court notes that the Case Number indicated on the Cashier’s Check indicates Case No. 18-10357-WJ, where that number should end in "MH."
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Isaias Solano Represented By
    Edward T Weber
    Movant(s):
    PNC Bank, National Association Represented By
    Armin M Kolenovic
    10:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Isaias Solano
    
    Chapter 13
    Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11889
    
    Jose Luis Rodriguez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1166 Mandevilla Way, Corona, CA 92879
    
    MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
    
    EH
    
    Docket 14
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    05/08/2018
    Service: Proper Opposition: None
    
    GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 3 and 12 of the prayer for relief.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jose Luis Rodriguez Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    The Bank of New York Mellon, as Represented By
    Nancy L Lee
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:18-12807
    
    G Hurtado Construction, Inc.
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #14.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
    (2) Requiring Status Report EH
    Docket 18
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11085
    
    Hyon C. Kwon
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #1.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and American Honda Finance Corporation Re: 2016 Honda Civic
    
    Also #2 EH
    Docket 9
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Hyon C. Kwon Represented By Stephen S Smyth
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11085
    
    Hyon C. Kwon
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #2.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Toyota Motor Credit Corporation re: Toyota Prius
    
    Also #1 EH
    Docket 12
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Hyon C. Kwon Represented By Stephen S Smyth
    Trustee(s):
    Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-11202
    
    William Lanfranca and Karen Jean Lanfranca
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #3.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Alaska USA Federal Credit Union; (2011 Dodge Challenger), in the amount of $8,604.75
    
    EH
    
    Docket 10
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    William Lanfranca Pro Se
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Karen Jean Lanfranca Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    10:00 AM
    6:18-12358
    
    Kyle Montoya
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #4.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Daimler Trust; (Leased 2017 Mercedes-Benz C43W4, VIN# 55SWF6EB6HU187360), in the amount of
    $30,859.18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 10
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Kyle Montoya Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:11-12704
    
    Jason Lopez and Julie Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien with Citibank National Association (fdba Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.)
    
    EH
    
    Docket 35
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/9/2018
    The Court is inclined to DENY the motion without prejudice for insufficient evidence. Debtors’ motion refers to two senior liens: a voluntary lien held by Chase, and a judgment lien held by Citibank. Regarding the former, Debtors have provided a copy of a mortgage statement from August 2017 (more than six years after the petition date) showing an amount owing of $222,318.21. Regarding the latter, Debtors’ declaration references an exhibit (exhibit 7) which does not appear to have been included in the motion. Therefore, Debtors have not provided any evidence demonstrating the amount owing, as of the petition date, for either lien. As a result, it is not clear whether, as of the petition date, the second judgment lien of Citibank impaired an exemption of Debtors.
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jason Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Jason Lopez and Julie Lopez
    Chapter 7
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Julie Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Movant(s):
    Jason Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Julie Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Trustee(s):
    Christopher R Barclay (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:15-11982
    
    Extreme Exhibits Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 101
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/9/2018
    
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 2,271 Trustee Expenses: $ 481.65
    
    Attorney Fees: $ 9,883.43 Attorney Costs: $ 856.11
    
    Accountant Fees: $2,673 Accountant Costs: $309.40
    
    Auctioneer Fees: $4,450.84 Accountant Costs: $300
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Extreme Exhibits Inc
    
    Chapter 7
    Extreme Exhibits Inc Represented By Ronald L Brownson
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung
    11:00 AM
    6:17-10537
    
    Abel Ortega and Maria Del R. Avalos De Ortega
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #7.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 25
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/9/2018
    
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 509.50 Trustee Expenses: $ 26.33
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Abel Ortega Represented By
    James Geoffrey Beirne
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Maria Del R. Avalos De Ortega Represented By
    James Geoffrey Beirne
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-14013
    
    Barbara J Ritter
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #8.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 23
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/9/2018
    
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 1,250 Trustee Expenses: $ 44.40
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Barbara J Ritter Represented By Christina M Holt
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:18-12255
    
    Paola Michelle Hartman
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #9.00 Order to show cause re dismissal for failure to comply with rule 1006(B) - installments
    
    EH
    
    Docket 14
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Paola Michelle Hartman Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:14-17350
    
    Dean L. Springer, Sr. and Tami Jo Springer
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #10.00 CONT Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order
    
    From: 8/30/17, 9/20/17, 11/1/17, 12/13/17, 2/7/18, 2/28/18, 3/28/18
    
    EH
    
    Docket 148
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/6/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Dean L. Springer Sr. Pro Se
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Tami Jo Springer Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Hilder & Associates Represented By
    Lei Lei Wang Ekvall
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Richard A Marshack Sarah Cate Hays
    D Edward Hays Laila Masud
    11:00 AM
    6:15-21570
    
    Janice Elaine Cox
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #11.00 Motion to Sell Property of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens under Section 363(f) for property at 1059 Hugo Lane, Big Bear City, CA 92314
    
    EH
    
    Docket 68
    Tentative Ruling:
    5/9/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On November 30, 2015, Janice Cox ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On Schedule A, Debtor listed certain secondary real property located at1059 Hugo Ln., Big Bear City, CA 92314 (the "Property"). On March 11, 2016, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Malcolm Cisneros as general counsel. On March 21, 2016, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Steven Speier as real estate broker.1 On February 15, 2018, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Sarah Polley ("Broker") as real estate agent. On February 21, 2018, the Court entered an order directing Debtor to turn over the Property.
    
    On April 18, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for an order: (1) authorizing Trustee to sell the Property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(b), free and clear of liens pursuant to 11
    U.S.C. § 363(f); (2) approving overbid procedures; (3) approving compensation of Trustee’s broker; (4) authorizing distribution of sale proceeds; (5) determining that the proposed buyers are "good faith purchasers" under 11 U.S.C. § 363(m); and (6) waiving the 14 day state imposed by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(h). The proposed sale price is $234,000. Trustee proposes to pay $50,866.40 for delinquent property taxes, $19,783 for Debtor’s exemption, $14,040 for Broker’s commission, and $4,680 for other costs of sale. The remaining $145,630.60 will accrue to the bankruptcy estate.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Janice Elaine Cox
    
    Chapter 7
    
    DISCUSSION
    1. Sale of Estate Property
      
      11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1) allows a trustee to sell property of the estate outside of the ordinary course, after notice and a hearing. A sale pursuant to § 363(b) requires a demonstration that the sale has a valid business justification. In re 240 North Brand Parners, Ltd., 200 B.R. 653, 659 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1996). "In approving any sale outside the ordinary course of business, the court must not only articulate a sufficient business reason for the sale, it must further find it is in the best interest of the estate,
      i.e. it is fair and reasonable, that it has been given adequate marketing, that it has been negotiated and proposed in good faith, that the purchaser is proceeding in good faith, and that it is an "arms-length" transaction." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal.).
      
      While it appears that Broker only marketed the property for six weeks, Broker’s declaration has detailed significant efforts to market the property and the bid currently under review is close to the original listing price. Given the marketing of the property, the fact that the sale appears to be a good faith, arms-length transaction, and the fact that the estate would receive $145,630.60 for distribution to unsecured creditors, the Court concludes that Trustee has articulated an adequate business reason for the sale.
    2. Sale Free & Clear of Liens
      
      11 U.S.C. § 363(f) (2010) states:
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Janice Elaine Cox
      
      Chapter 7
      1. The trustee may sell property under subsection (b) or (c) of this section free and clear of any interest in such property of an entity other than the estate, only if-
        
        applicable nonbankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest;
        such entity consents;
        such interest is a lien and the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on such property;
        such interest is in bona fide dispute; or
        such entity could be compelled, in a legal or equitable proceeding, to accept a money satisfaction of such interest.
      Trustee contends that § 363(f)(3) is applicable. First, Trustee contends that aggregate value of all encumbrances on the property is $69,649.40, which is exceeded by the purchase price of $234,000.
      
      Because Trustee has established that § 363(f)(3) is applicable, and in the absence of any objection, Trustee has met its burden in securing a sale free and clear of liens.
    3. 14-Day Stay
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(h) states: "An order authorizing the use, sale, or lease of property other than cash collateral is stayed until the expiration of 14 days after entry of the order, unless the court orders otherwise." The Court deems the absence of objections to be consent to the relief requested, pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), and, therefore, will waive the stay of Rule 6004(h).
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Janice Elaine Cox
    4. Miscellaneous Provisions
      
      Chapter 7
      
      The Court has reviewed the remainder of Trustee’s miscellaneous requests. The Court has reviewed the proposed overbidding procedures and finds such procedures to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed the requested Broker compensation of 6% of the sale price (totaling $14,040) and finds such compensation to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed Trustee’s proposed distribution of sale proceeds, and the Court finds that such distribution is reasonable and proper. Finally, the Court finds it appropriate to waive the Rule 6004(h) stay.
      
      Finally, the Court has reviewed the declarations of the purchasers, Oscar and Ana Garcia (the "Garcias"), and finds the declarations sufficient for a determination that the Garcias are good faith purchasers pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363 (m).
      
      TENTATIVE RULING
      
      The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion in its entirety. Specifically, the Court is inclined ot authorize the sale of the Property free and clear of liens, approve the overbid procedures, approve the Broker’s compensation, authorize the distribution of sale proceeds, determine that the Garcias are good faith purchasers and waived the 14- day stay under Rule 6004(h).
      
      APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
      
      Party Information
      Debtor(s):
      Janice Elaine Cox Represented By Rajiv Jain
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      Movant(s):
      
      Janice Elaine Cox
      
      Chapter 7
      Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O
      Trustee(s):
      Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O
      11:00 AM
      6:13-27344
      
      Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
      
      Chapter 7
      
      #12.00 Status Conference re Emergency motion for Telephonic Hearing In Accordance with Court's Oral Ruling on March 28, 2018
      
      Also #13 - #15
      
      EH
      
      Docket 588
      
      Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
    Movant(s):
    Douglas J Roger, MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
    11:00 AM
    6:13-27344
    
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #13.00 Motion For Order Authorizing Sale of Claims of the Estate (A) Outside the Ordinary Course of Business; (B) Subject to Overbid; and (C) for Determination of Good Faith Purchaser Under Section 363(M)
    (HOLDING DATE)
    
    Also #12 - #15
    
    EH
    
    Docket 578
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
    Movant(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
    11:00 AM
    6:13-27344
    
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #14.00 CONT Second Joint Motion and Moving Memorandum by Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation for Order Approving Settlement between Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation
    (HOLDING DATE)
    
    From: 2/14/18, 3/28/18 Also #12 - #15
    EH
    
    Docket 521
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
    Movant(s):
    Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
    11:00 AM
    6:13-27344
    
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #15.00 CONT Order setting hearing on Opposition to Notice of Lodgment From: 3/28/18
    Also #12 - #14
    
    EH
    
    Docket 542
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
    Trustee(s):
    Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
    D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
    2:00 PM
    6:16-11635
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al
    
    #16.00 CONT Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment or Alternatively Partial Summary Adjudication
    
    From: 3/7/18 Also #17
    EH
    
    Docket 68
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
    3/7/2018
    Olivares requests that the Court apply issue preclusion and find that the Judgment is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The Bankruptcy Code excepts from discharge any debt for "willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity." 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The creditor bears the burden of proving each element of § 523(a)(6) by a preponderance of the evidence.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    See, e.g., Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 287 (1991).
    To prevail on a claim under § 523(a)(6), a creditor must demonstrate three elements:
    1. willful conduct; (2) malice; and (3) causation. See In re Butcher, 200 B.R. 675, 680 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1996) (quoting In re Apte, 180 B.R. 223, 230 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1995)). A willful injury is a "deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57, 61 (1998). "A malicious injury involves (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse." In re Barboza, 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting In re Jercich, 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir. 2001)).
      
      Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R. BANKR. P. 7056).
      
      The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324. The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.
      
      If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).
      
      A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.
      1. Plaintiff’s State Court Claim
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        
        Chapter 7
        
        The legal provision under which the relevant portion of the Judgment was based is
        CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(j)(1), which states:
        It is an unlawful employment practice, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification, or, except where based upon applicable security regulations established by the United States or the State of California:
        
        (j)(1) For an employer, labor organization, employment agency, apprenticeship training program or any training program leading to employment, or any other person, because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status, to harass an employee, an applicant, an unpaid intern or volunteer, or a person providing services pursuant to a contract. Harassment of an employee, an applicant, an unpaid intern or volunteer, or a person providing services pursuant to a contract by an employee, other than an agent or supervisor, shall be unlawful if the entity, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. An employer may also be responsible for the acts of nonemployees, with respect to sexual harassment of employees, applicants, unpaid interns or volunteers, or persons providing services pursuant to a contract in the workplace, if the employer, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. In reviewing cases involving the acts of nonemployees, the extent of the employer’s control and any other legal responsibility that the employer may have with respect to the conduct of those nonemployees shall be considered. An entity shall take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring. Loss of tangible job benefits shall not be necessary in order to establish harassment.
        
        Olivares reference EEOC guidelines which create two categories of sexual harassment: (1) quid pro quo and (2) hostile environment. Olivares also points to case law which acknowledges the two categories. See, e.g., Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v.
        Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 65 (1986); Beyda v. City of Los Angeles, 65 Cal. App. 4th 511, 516-517 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) ("There are two recognized categories of sexual harassment claims. The first is quid pro quo harassment, where a term of employment or employment itself is conditioned upon submission to unwelcome sexual advances. The second, and the one at issue in this case, is hostile work environment, where the harassment is sufficiently pervasive so as to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive work environment.") (citations and quotations omitted).
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        
        Chapter 7
        The delineation of two separate categories of sexual harassment is relevant and important here. First, the Court notes that the Judgement references Olivares’s claim for "Hostile Work Environment and Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harssament," and the state court specifically identified separate damages for "past emotional distress hostile work environment" and "past emotional distress quid pro quo sexual harassment." [Dkt. No. 70 at pg. 8, lines 1-2]. Because these two categories of sexual harassment implicate different issues and require different findings to be made, issue preclusion may operate differently with respect to each issue.
      2. Issue Preclusion on Plaintiff’s Claim under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6)
        
        Issue preclusion applies in nondischargeability proceedings to bar the relitigation of factual issues that were determined in a prior state court action. See, e.g., Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 284-85, n.11 (1991). To determine the issue-preclusive effect of a California state court's judgment, California preclusion law must be applied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738; Marrese v. Am. Acad. of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 380
        (1985); Gayden v. Nourbakhsh (In re Nourbakhsh), 67 F.3d 798, 800 (9th Cir. 1995). Under California law, the party asserting issue preclusion has the burden of establishing the following "threshold" requirements:
        the issue sought to be precluded must be identical to that decided in a former proceeding;
        the issue must have been actually litigated in the former proceeding;
        it must have been necessarily decided in the former proceeding;
        the decision in the former proceeding must be final and on the merits; and,
        the party against whom preclusion is sought must be the same as, or in privity with, the party to the former proceeding.
        Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001).
        Additionally, the application of issue preclusion requires a "mandatory ‘additional’ inquiry into whether imposition of issue preclusion would be fair and consistent with sound public policy." In re Khaligh, 338 B.R. 817, 824–25 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2006). As stated by the California Supreme Court
        We have repeatedly looked to the public policies underlying the
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        doctrine before concluding that collateral estoppel should be applied in a particular setting. Accordingly, the public policies underlying
        collateral estoppel—preservation of the integrity of the judicial system, promotion of judicial economy, and protection of litigants from harassment by vexatious litigation—strongly influence whether its application in a particular circumstance would be fair to the parties and constitutes sound judicial policy.
        
        Chapter 7
        
        Lucido v. Super. Ct., 51 Cal. 3d 335, 342–43 (Cal. 1990) (internal citations omitted).
        
        Here, the Court’s focus is on the second and third elements of the Harmon test because there is no dispute that the Judgement is final and on the merits, and that the parties are the same. Specifically, the Court is concerned with whether "willfulness" was actually litigated and necessarily decided in state court.4
        
        For a default judgment to be "actually litigated," the material factual issues must have been both raised in the pleadings and necessary to uphold the default judgment.
        Gottlieb v. Kest, 141 Cal. App. 4th 110, 149 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). An express finding need not have occurred if the court in the prior proceeding necessarily decided the issue. Cantrell v. Cal–Micro, Inc. (In re Cantrell), 329 F.3d 1119, 1124 (9th Cir.2003).
        
        Under California law, an issue is necessarily decided when (1) there are explicit findings of an issue made in a judgment or decision, or (2) or when the issue is a conclusion that must have been necessarily decided by the court. Samuels v. CMW Joint Venture (In re Samuels), 273 F. App'x 691, 693 (9th Cir. 2008).
        
        Olivares argues that "[c]ourts analogize quid pro quo sexual harassment to ‘extortion,’ which is not only an intentional tort but is also a crime." [Dkt. No. 68, pg. 14, lines
        24-26]. The Court finds the analogy to be apt. The injury sustained in a quid pro quo sexual harassment claim is a tangible, negative effect on employment terms. See, e.g., Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897, 909 (11th Cir. 1982). The quid pro quo conditioning of these employment terms is, necessarily, an intentional action of the employer. As noted in section III, "willfulness" requires an intentional injury, not merely an intentional act. In the case of quid pro quo sexual harassment, the distinction is illusory – intentionally and negatively conditioning an individual’s employment terms with unwanted sexual advances is the equivalent of intentionally causing an injury. See, e.g., In re Roth, 2014 WL 684630 at *6 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2014)
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
        
        Chapter 7
        (applying issue preclusion to find quid pro quo sexual harassment to be willful, albeit in a non-default situation). Therefore, that part of the Judgment which deals with quid pro quo sexual harassment contains a finding of "willfulness."
        
        The analysis regarding hostile workplace, however, is different. As noted by Olivares, the "hostile workplace" theory of sexual harassment generally requires unwanted sexual advances that have the "effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance." Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 65 (1986). In contrast to the quid pro quo liability, where the injury results from an employer’s intentional reaction or retaliation, the injury under a hostile workplace theory is subjective and dependent upon the employee’s perspective. An employer is certainly capable of unintentionally creating a hostile work environment.
        
        The issue preclusion section of Olivares’s motion for summary judgment focuses on the quid pro quo theory of sexual harassment. The Court agrees with Olivares’s that "willfulness," as it is used in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6), is implicit within a judgment for quid pro quo sexual harassment. But it is not necessarily implicit in a judgment under the "hostile workplace" theory of sexual harassment – the hostile workplace could be created negligently or unintentionally, based on incorrect assumptions of the employer.
        
        Dason has not advanced any argument why the application of collateral estoppel to the facts of this specific case would not be "fair and consistent with sound public policy." Dason’s opposition concedes Dason was aware that a trial was scheduled and the date when the trial would occur. Yet, after three years of litigation, no appearance was made on behalf of Dason at the trial. Given the extensive litigation that occurred in state court and the fact that the non-appearance of Dason at trial was due to a conscious choice, and part of a deliberate litigation strategy, the Court concludes that application of issue preclusion would continue the preserve the integrity of the judicial system and promote judicial economy. Thus, partial application of issue preclusion would further the policy and interests underlying the doctrine. See, e.g., In re Baldwin, 249 F.3d 912, 919-920 (9th Cir. 2001) (describing policies underlining collateral estoppel).
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Sam Daniel Dason
      3. Absence of a Genuine Issue of Material Fact
    Chapter 7
    
    Olivares alternatively argues that the record in this case is sufficient to warrant summary judgment independent of the state court judgment. The Court disagrees. The record in this case essentially consists of: (1) Olivares’s extensive and detailed description of the alleged sexual harassment; and (2) Dason’s denial of the allegations. After the partial application of issue preclusion noted above, the only remaining factual issue is whether the "willfulness" requirement of § 523(a)(6) is satisfied as to that part of the Judgment which arises from a hostile workplace theory of sexual harassment. Here, the Court is simply presented with competing declarations from Dason and Olivares which assert, respectively, that Dason did not intend to create a hostile workplace environment and that it can be inferred that Dason had such an intention. Apart from those declarations, the record contains two pages of a deposition of Cesar Espinoza stating that Olivares complained that Dason grabbed her posterior at some point in time. Given the paucity of the existing record and the unambiguously contradictory declarations of Dason and Olivares, the Court concludes that summary judgment is inapplicable on this record.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT summary judgment as to the Judgment in so far as the Judgment relates to a quid pro quo theory of sexual harassment and DENY summary judgment in so far as the Judgment relates to a hostile workplace theory of sexual harassment for failure to satisfy the "willfulness" requirement of § 523(a)(6). The Court may order briefing regarding the apportionment of damages that are not specifically assigned to one category.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Debtor(s):
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Defendant(s):
    Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Movant(s):
    Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
    Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
    Juddy Olivares Pro Se
    Plaintiff(s):
    Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
    Trustee(s):
    Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
    2:00 PM
    6:16-11635
    
    Sam Daniel Dason
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al
    
    #17.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Amended Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason; 68- Dischargeability - 523(a)(6) Willful and Malicious Injury
    
    From: 11/2/16, 1/4/17, 3/1/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17, 1/24/18, 3/7/18
    
    Also #16 EH
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Defendant(s):
  Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
  Plaintiff(s):
  Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Sam Daniel Dason
  
  Chapter 7
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15809
  
  Beatrice A Diaz
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01287 Cisneros v. Diaz
  
  #18.00 Motion for Default Judgment Under LBR 7055-1 Also #19
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/9/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On July 12, 2017, Beatrice Diaz ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On December 20, 2017, Trustee filed a complaint for: (1) declaratory relief; (2) turnover of property and (3) sale of interest of co-owner in property of the estate against Jose Diaz ("Defendant"), the non-filing spouse of Debtor. On January 24, 2018, the clerk entered default against Defendant. On April 17, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for default judgment.
  
  According to Trustee, in 1994, Debtor and Defendant obtained title to certain real property located at 619 Calle Cuesta, Watsonville, CA 95076 (the "Property") as husband and wife as joint tenants. Trustee requests an order (1) determining that the Property is community, (2) ordering Defendant to turn over the property; and (3) allowing Trustee to sell the property free and clear of Defendant’s interest.
  
  DISCUSSION
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Beatrice A Diaz
  
  Chapter 7
  1. Entry of Default
    FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
  2. Motion for Default Judgment
    1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
      1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
        
        Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
        
        Here, it is not clear that service was proper. Trustee has only served Defendant at the Property, yet Debtor’s Schedule H lists Defendant’s address as 21 Del Brienza, Lake Elsinor, CA 92532, which is also the primary residence of Debtor. Trustee’s declaration does not provide any indication as to why Debtor was not served at the
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Beatrice A Diaz
        
        Chapter 7
        address identified in the schedules.
    2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
      
      Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").
      
      Here, the complaint includes three causes of action: (1) declaratory relief; (2) turnover; and (3) authorization to sell the Property free and clear of Defendant’s interests.
      
      Regarding the first cause of action, declaratory relief, under California law there is a presumption that property acquired during marriage is community property. See, e.g, In re Valli, 58 Cal. 4th 1396, 1400 (Cal. 2014) ("Property that a spouse acquired during the marriage is community property unless it is (1) traceable to a separate property source, (2) acquired by gift or bequest, or (3) earned or accumulated while the spouses are living separate and apart.") (citations omitted) (collecting cases).
      Trustee has presented the an authenticated copy of the grant deed which specifies that Debtor and Defendant acquired the property as husband and wife, and there is no evidence to rebut the community property presumption. Therefore, Trustee has met his burden on the first cause of action.
      
      Regarding the second cause of action, turnover of property, 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(2) states:
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Beatrice A Diaz
      1. The commencement of a case under section 301, 302, or 303 of this title creates an estate. Such estate is comprised of all the following property, wherever located and by whomever held:
        
        All interests of the debtor and the debtor’s spouse in community property as of the commencement of the case that is –
        
        under the sole, equal, or joint management and control of the debtor; or
        
        liable for an allowable claim against the debtor, or for both an allowable claim against the debtor and an allowable claim against the debtor’s spouse to the extent that such interest is so liable.
        
        Chapter 7
        
        In California, community property interests are liable for claims against both spouses. See, e.g., CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 695.020. Therefore, the Property is property of the estate subject to turnover under § 542.
        
        Regarding the third cause of action, 11 U.S.C. § 363(h) states:
        
        Notwithstanding subsection (f) of this section, the trustee may sell both the estate’s interest, under subsection (b) or (c) of this section, and the interest of any co-owner in property in which the debtor had, at the time of the commencement of the case, an undivided interest as a tenant in common, joint tenant, or tenant by the entirety, only if ---
        
        partition in kind of such property among the estate and such co- owner is impracticable;
        
        sale of the estate’s undivided interest in such property would realize significantly less for the estate than sale of such property free of the interests of such co-owners;
        the benefit to the estate of a sale of such property free of the
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        Beatrice A Diaz
        interests of co-owners outweighs the detriment, if an, to such co- owners; and
        such property is not used in the production, transmission, or
      Chapter 7
      distribution, for sale of electric energy or of natural or synthetic gas for heat, light, or power.
      
      Here, because the property in question is community property, § 363(h) is inapplicable. See, e.g., 3 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 363.08[3] (16th ed. 2013) ("Section 363(h) does not apply to property held as community property. Under section 541(a)(1), property of the estate includes all community property to the extent that community property is either under the control of the debtor or liable for claims against the debtor. As a result, the trustee need not satisfy the conditions in subsections 363(h)(1)-(4) to sell community property."). Therefore, this request is is denied.
    3. Amount of Damages
  Here, Trustee is not requesting any damages, and, therefore, no evidence is required establishing the amount of damages.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  Trustee to explain why it has only served Defendant at the Property instead of serving Defendant at the location identified on Schedule H. If Trustee can establish that service is proper, The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion as to the first and second causes of action, and DENY, as moot, the motion with respect to the third cause of action.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Beatrice A Diaz
  
  Party Information
  
  Chapter 7
  Beatrice A Diaz Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  Jose L Diaz Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Arturo M. Cisneros Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  Plaintiff(s):
  Arturo M. Cisneros Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  Anthony A Friedman
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15809
  
  Beatrice A Diaz
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01287 Cisneros v. Diaz
  
  #19.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01287. Complaint by Arturo M. Cisneros against Jose L Diaz. (Charge To Estate). - Complaint: (1) for Declaratory Relief; (2) Turnover of Property; and (3) Sale of Interest of Co- Owner in Property of the Estate [11 U.S.C. §§ 363 542] - Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)),(31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))) (Friedman, Anthony)
  
  From: 2/28/18 Also #18
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Beatrice A Diaz Pro Se
  Defendant(s):
  Jose L Diaz Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Arturo M. Cisneros Represented By Anthony A Friedman
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
  Anthony A Friedman
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Beatrice A Diaz
  
  Chapter 7
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01057 Whitson et al v. Bastorous
  
  #20.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State A Claim Pursuant to FRBP 712(b) and FRCP 12(b)(6)
  
  Also #21 EH
  Docket 5
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/9/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On December 8, 2017, Mark Bastorous & Bernadette Shenouda filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition.
  
  On March 9, 2018, Blaine & Susan Whitston (the "Whitsons"), Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Plan ("UHLPSP"), Gurpaljit Deoll ("Deoll"), Benny Winefeld ("Winefeld") and RM Holdings, LLC ("RM") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint against Mark Bastorous ("Defendant") for non-dischargeability pursuant to
  § 523(a)(2) and (6). On April 9, 2018, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6). On April 25, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their opposition.
  
  According to Plaintiffs, Defendant is the co-founder, and now majority owner, of a business entity called USA Investments Group, LLC ("USAIG"). Defendant was also involved in a business entity, MB Capital Group, LLC ("MB Capital"), founded by his
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  business partner, Menasseh Bareh ("Bareh"). Defendant is now the sole owner of MB Capital. Defendant’s real estate projects were generally run under the umbrella of Professionals Investment Group, LLC ("PIG"). Among these real estate interests was certain real property located at 0 Talcey Terrace, Riverside, CA 92506 (the "Property"), which, prior to January 2015, was owned by USAIG.
  
  According to Plaintiffs, UHLPSP was approached by two brokers about a loan for MB Capital, which was seeking funds to purchase the Property. Ultimately, MB Capital obtained a loan in the amount of $1,100,000; the loan was serviced by UHLPSP, and the remainder of the Plaintiffs funded the majority of the loan transaction. Defendant allegedly acted as the real estate broker for the sale of the Property by USAIG to MB Capital. Plaintiffs received a first position mortgage on the Property.
  
  According to Plaintiffs, the sale of the Property of the property was actually a "sham" by Defendant, who orchestrated of the sale of the Property from one of his business entities to another in order to obtain a loan, the funds from which were used to pay off other debt. After making payments for more than a year, MB Capital ultimately defaulted on the property, and, eventually, the Property was foreclosed upon, netting Plaintiffs only $774,000.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
    
    In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Mark Bastorous
    
    Chapter 7
  2. MONEY JUDGMENT IN NON-DISCHARGEABILITY PROCEEDINGS
    
    The Ninth Circuit has held that a bankruptcy court may enter a monetary judgment on a disputed state law fraud claim in the course of determining that the debt is nondischargeable. Cowen v. Kennedy (In re Kennedy), 108 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir.1997). Shawn Deitz v. Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford (In re Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford), 469
    B.R. 11, 21 (9th Cir. BAP 2012), aff'd, 760 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2014). Nevertheless, in the complaint at issue here, Plaintiffs have set forth only two causes of action: (1) non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A); and (2) non- dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 526(a). 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) alone is not a basis to enter a money judgment; the plain language of the statute provides that it is a basis for finding a debt to be non-dischargeable. If Plaintiffs seek a money judgment, they need to set forth a non-bankruptcy law cause of action supporting that request.1 In order words, Plaintiffs need to establish that a debt exists under state law. Without that showing, it is impossible to determine the applicable legal analysis.
  3. NON-DISCHARGEABILITY
  As 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) makes clear, the first element in any non-dischargeability proceeding is that the debtor owe the plaintiff a debt. The complaint at issue here fails to plead adequate factual matter detailing the debt owing.
  
  The Bankruptcy Code defines "debt" as "liability on a claim." 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). The Bankruptcy Code defines "claim" as "right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidate, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured." 11 U.S.C. § 101(5).
  
  The only paragraph in the complaint which presumably alleges that Plaintiffs have a
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  claim against Defendant is paragraph 57, which states: "Plaintiffs are entitled to a return of all the monies that they were compelled to provide in the form of the loan proceeds to Bastorous and Bastorous’ alter egos, agents, dbas, through this fraudulent misrepresentations and concealment." This assertion is implausible on its face, as it appears to assert a debt in the amount of $671,000 based on an unexplained legal theory. According to the complaint, Plaintiffs lent Defendant approximately 61% of
  $1,100,000 (or approximately $671,000) and recouped 61% of $774,000 (or approximately $472,140). It would appear, based on the figures provided by Plaintiffs, that Plaintiffs lost $198,860 in their investment – which seems to be the source of the statement in paragraph 58, that "[a]s a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s fraudulent acts, Plaintiffs have suffered damages in a total sum of not less than
  $198,000."
  
  Yet, the assertion in paragraph 58 is not adequate to allege a debt – it is simply an allegation of damages, an always necessary element of a legal claim, but not, itself, a legal claim. While it may be possible to piece together fragments of the complaint to craft a coherent, cognizable claim, the nature and theory of such a claim are less than clear. The Court declines to engage in such artistry, especially given that because an independent cause of action is necessary to support the request for a money judgment, it appears likely the complaint will ultimately need to be amended to provide such detail regardless.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and DISMISS the complaint without prejudice to filing an amended complaint within 30 days of the entry of the order. Parties to address referral to mediation.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Thomas F Nowland
  
  Chapter 7
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Movant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
  Plaintiff(s):
  Blaine Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Susan Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Represented By
  Benjamin Taylor
  Gurpaljit Deoll Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Benny Winefeld Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  RM Holdings, LLC Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01057 Whitson et al v. Bastorous
  
  #21.00 Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01057. Complaint by Blaine Whitson, Susan Whitson, Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Plan, Gurpaljit Deoll, Benny Winefeld, RM Holdings, LLC against Mark Bastorous. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))
  
  Also #20 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Plaintiff(s):
  Blaine Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Susan Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Represented By
  Benjamin Taylor
  Gurpaljit Deoll Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Benny Winefeld Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  RM Holdings, LLC Represented By Benjamin Taylor
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al
  
  #22.00 Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01061. Complaint by Mina Farah, Mark Bastorous against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(01 (Determination of removed claim or cause))
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/11/18 AT 2:00 P.M. ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mina Farah Represented By
  Wayne W Suojanen
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al
  
  #23.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01062. Complaint by Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Suojanen, Wayne)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/11/18 AT 2:00 P.M. ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Plaintiff(s):
  Anis Khalil Represented By
  Wayne W Suojanen
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al
  
  #24.00 Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01063. Complaint by Chienan Chen, Chun-Wu Li against Mark Bastorous. False pretenses, False representation, Actual fraud, 65 - Dischargeability - other; 14 - Recovery of money/property - other, 13 - Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/6/18 AT 2:00 P.M. - ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Pro Se
  3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se
  Mike Bareh Represented By
  Mirco J Haag
  MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se
  Bernadette Shenouda Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey
  Chun-Wu Li Represented By
  Douglas L Mahaffey
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al
  
  #25.00 Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 5/16/18 AT 2:00 PM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mona Gerges Represented By
  Louis J Esbin
  Rafet Gerges Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Louis J Esbin
  
  Chapter 7
  St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:18-01050 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certifica v. FMJM RWL III
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding From: 4/26/18
  Also #2 EH
  Docket 3
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/10/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On December 13, 2017, Sean Coy ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On February 2, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to avoid the lien of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company ("Deutsche"). On February 15, 2018, Deutsche filed its opposition to the motion to avoid lien. In its opposition, Deutsche argued that a portion of the originally senior lien1, held by FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 ("FMJM") is actually subordinate to the originally junior lien2 of Deutsche, due to the execution, after the recordation of Deutsche’s lien, of a mortgage modification without the consent of Deutsche which Deutsche argues materially prejudices its junior lien.
  Deutsche argued that because of this subordination, its lien was not wholly unsecured, and therefore could not be avoided.
  
  On February 27, 2018, Deutsche filed a complaint against FMJM seeking declaratory relief. On March 30, 2018, FMJM filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On April 12, 2018, Deutsche filed its opposition. By stipulation of the parties, the
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  instant hearing has been previously continued for two weeks.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
    
    In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. "While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations." Id. at 464. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id at 678.
  2. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001(2) & (9) state the following:
  
  An adversary proceeding is governed by the rules of this Part VII. The following are adversary proceedings:
  
  (2) a proceeding to determine the validity, priority, or extent of a lien or other interest in property, other than a proceeding under Rule 4003(d);
  
  (9) a proceeding to obtain a declaratory judgment relating to any of the foregoing
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Here, Deutsche seeks a judgment declaring that its lien is entitled to higher priority that a portion of FMJM’s lien.
  
  The starting point for priority of liens under California law is "first in time, first in right." See generally CAL. CIV. CODE § 2897. Deutsche points to Gluskin v. Atlantic Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 32 Cal. App. 3d 307 (Cal. Ct. App. 1973) and Lennar Ne.
  Partners v. Buice, 49 Cal. App. 4th 1576 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) as standing for the proposition that if a senior lienholder executed a modification which prejudices the junior lienholder, the senior lienholder may lose priority to the extent of the modification. See also MILLER & STARR CAL. REAL ESTATE § 10:102 (4th ed. 2017) ("If modifications in the senior lien have a material adverse effect on the junior lien either by increasing the risk of default or making protection of the junior lienor’s position potentially more burdensome, then the senior lien may lose priority to the junior lien."). FMJM argues that the cases cited above contain unique factual situations not applicable here and that the California Court of Appeals has constrained the holding of Gluskin and Lennar to specific factual situations. See Friery v. Sutter Buttes Sav. Bank, 61 Cal. App. 4th 869 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998); see also MILLER & STARR CAL. REAL ESTATE § 10:102 (4th ed. 2017) ("The possible argument from these earlier cases, that all junior lienors, not solely subordinating sellers, should be able to gain priority over modifications to the senior lien made without their consent, has been rejected.").
  
  Recently, citing all three of the above cases, the California Court of Appeals synthesized the existing case law with the following succinct statement:
  
  Subsequent cases have made clear that a material modification of a senior lien, such as an increase in the principal or interest rate, does not result in loss of priority absent contractual subordination. Where a seller agrees to subordinate to construction loans, a material modification of those loans may result in their total loss of priority. However, in the case of a subordinating junior lender, only the modification of the senior lien loses priority.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  Bank of New York Mellon v. Citibank, N.A., 8 Cal. App. 5th 935, 954 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (citations omitted).
  
  FMJM implicitly, and to some degree explicitly, asserts that this case is closer to the situation in Friery than the situation in Lennar. This Court disagrees. Here, the notes now held by FMJM and Deutsche were executed simultaneously, as first and second mortgage, with the intention that the security interest evidenced by the second mortgage be subordinated to the security interest evidenced by the first mortgage. In Friery, however, there was originally only a single lien on the property – the original borrowers then sold the property to a third party, who encumbered the property with additional liens. That is not the situation here. Here, the two mortgages were executed simultaneously, similar to the situation in Lennar, and, as a result, the subordination principles outlined by Bank of New York Mellon, Lennar, and Gluskin are applicable.
  
  In distinguishing Lennar from the instant situation, FMJM argues that, unlike the case in Lennar, here the modification did not materially prejudice the junior lienholder, Deutsche. The Court need not reach this argument at the motion to dismiss standard because such an argument is usually factual in nature. See MILLER & STARR CAL. REAL ESTATE § 10:102 (4th ed. 2017) ("Usually, whether a modification has a material adverse impact on a junior lienor is a question of act, but when reasonable minds cannot differ, the conclusion that the modification resulted in a material adverse effect can be decided as a matter of law."). While FMJM has provided arguments as to why the Deutsche is not prejudiced by the modification, the complaint of Deutsche alleges sufficient factual matter to plausibly allege that material prejudice could plausibly have occurred. FMJM’s assertions on this point are not appropriate at the motion to dismiss stage.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion to dismiss.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Party Information
  
  Chapter 13
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Defendant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Movant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Plaintiff(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By
  Kristin A Zilberstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:18-01050 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certifica v. FMJM RWL III
  
  #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01050. Complaint by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certificate Trustee on Behalf of Bosco Credit II Trust Series 2010-1 against FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1.
  Kristin)
  
  From: 4/26/18 Also #1
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Defendant(s):
  FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal
  Plaintiff(s):
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By
  Kristin A Zilberstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-19432
  
  Ryan Eddie Hinojosa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  EH
  
  Docket 39
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ryan Eddie Hinojosa Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Movant(s):
  Ryan Eddie Hinojosa Represented By Steven A Alpert Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-15427
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Motion to vacate dismissal Also #5
  EH
  
  Docket 69
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/10/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On June 29, 2017, Cary and Amber Surface ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 21, 2017, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.1
  
  On February 5, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for plan delinquency. After Debtors filed an opposition, the original hearing, on March 22, 2018, was continued for one week for a full cure. The day before the continued hearing, Debtors filed a supplemental declaration stating that their payment had still not posted to the Trustee’s website. On March 29, 2018, the Court continued the motion to dismiss for two more weeks, again for a full cure. Instead of curing, Debtors filed a motion to modify plan, and the Trustee filed comments indicating disapproval of the modification. On April 12, 2018, the case was dismissed.
  
  On April 23, 2018, Debtors filed a motion to vacate dismissal, as well as an application shortening time. The Court set a hearing for May 10, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. On April 24, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating his disapproval of Debtors’ request that the dismissal order be vacated nunc pro tunc, and indicated approval of
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  Debtors’ request to vacate dismissal, conditioned on Debtors’ full cure of the delinquency ($2,766) and the Debtors’ submission of their 2017 tax returns and refunds to Trustee.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Regarding Debtor’s request that the vacation of the dismissal order be nunc pro tunc, the Court agrees with the Trustee that such relief is not appropriate. Debtor’s motion does not contain legal authorities that directly support the proposition that the reinstatement of a case can, or should, be ordered nunc pro tunc. It is also not clear why Debtor has made such a request, although Trustee appears to assume that Debtor wishes to have the automatic stay retroactively imposed.
  
  The general rule is "that the reinstatement of a dismissed bankruptcy case does not retroactively reimpose the automatic stay." In re Lomagno, 320 B.R. 473, 479 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2005) (collecting cases); see also In re Nagel, 245 B.R. 657, 662 (D. Ariz.
  1999) ("By ‘undoing’ the return to the status quo ante through the retroactive application of the stay, the bankruptcy court engaged in a kind of judicial time travel that cannot be reconciled with the law.")
  
  As discussed in In re Lomagno, courts have recognized an exception when there is a violation of due process rights. See generally 320 B.R. at 480 ("Several courts have concluded that reinstatement of a dismissed bankruptcy case does not affect the validity of a creditor’s actions taken during the period the case was dismissed, unless there was a violation of due process rights.) (emphasis in original). Here, there is no indication that the situation fits within the exception to the general rule.
  
  Regarding Debtors’ request that the dismissal order be vacated, Debtors have not provided any legal authority for their request. Debtors’ motion contains two legal sections: (1) a section relating to nunc pro tunc relief; and (2) a section asserting that
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  the request is timely under FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60. Debtors have not, however, indicated which provision in FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60 is applicable to the instant situation, and have not presented any factual or legal analysis.
  
  Based upon the recommendation of Trustee, however, the Court will vacate the dismissal order if Debtors comply with the conditions specified in the Trustee’s comments.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion in accordance with the conditions and limitations outlined in the Trustee’s comments.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Movant(s):
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-15427
  
  Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  Also #4 EH
  Docket 60
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Movant(s):
  Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11449
  
  Cesar Valenzuela and Julissa Valenzuela
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Cesar Valenzuela Represented By Andrew Nguyen
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Julissa Valenzuela Represented By Andrew Nguyen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11476
  
  Randy Saulsberry and Kimberly E May
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Randy Saulsberry Represented By David L Nelson
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kimberly E May Represented By David L Nelson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11519
  
  Shirley M Clark
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Shirley M Clark Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11529
  
  Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11532
  
  Marsha Elizabeth Hall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Marsha Elizabeth Hall Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11579
  
  Pedro Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Pedro Ramirez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11636
  
  Amanuel Montrell Bradberry and Katrina Lashall
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Amanuel Montrell Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Katrina Lashall Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11638
  
  Elizabeth Taufaao
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Taufaao Represented By
  Benjamin A Yrungaray
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11652
  
  Gwendolyn Priscilla Saunders
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gwendolyn Priscilla Saunders Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11653
  
  Richard Espinoza
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Espinoza Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11692
  
  Michael James Gresham
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael James Gresham Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11701
  
  Wayne Anthony King and Traci Ann Zweck
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Wayne Anthony King Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Traci Ann Zweck Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11740
  
  Graham Sirwin Walker and Excyba Maiela Walker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Graham Sirwin Walker Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Excyba Maiela Walker Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11770
  
  Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Raymond Burrola Represented By Elena Steers
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Estela Burrola Represented By Elena Steers
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11818
  
  Caesar A Rodriguez and Roxane Arambula
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 3/8/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Caesar A Rodriguez Represented By Allan O Cate
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Roxane Arambula Represented By Allan O Cate
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11863
  
  David Fox
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  David Fox Represented By
  Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11890
  
  Rogelio Ramos and Maria Escobar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rogelio Ramos Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Maria Escobar Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:12-35294
  
  Penelope Ann Young
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case failure to complete the plan within its terms
  
  From: 11/9/17, 3/8/18 EH
  Docket 71
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/20/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Penelope Ann Young Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-28666
  
  Mildred Goodridge Crawford
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 206
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 3/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mildred Goodridge Crawford Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-19524
  
  Donnita M. Oliver
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 82
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  4/5/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Donnita M. Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-23150
  
  Vivian Munson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/12/18
  EH
  
  Docket 205
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-13233
  
  Sherry Ann Beardsley
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 66
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sherry Ann Beardsley Represented By Jeffrey D Larkin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-13595
  
  Robert P Contreras and Marie G Contreras
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Robert P Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Marie G Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-16909
  
  Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 174
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-21234
  
  Frank A Horzen and Barbara A Horzen
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #30.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/12/18, 4/26/18
  EH
  
  Docket 73
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Frank A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Barbara A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13063
  
  Ethel N Odimegwu
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #31.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 72
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVANCED TO 4/12/18 AT 12:30 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-16024
  
  Stacy N Reagor
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #32.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/26/18
  EH
  
  Docket 39
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Stacy N Reagor Represented By
  M Wayne Tucker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19787
  
  Gloria Hayslet
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #33.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 4/19/18, 4/26/18
  EH
  
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gloria Hayslet Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-10048
  
  Margaret Crain
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3300 Mary Ellen Dr, Riverside, California 92509-0816
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 66
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to apprise Court regarding extent of arrears and status of adequate protection discussions, if any.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Margaret Crain Represented By Lauren Rode
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt Jessica L Carter
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Margaret Crain
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-10257
  
  Cecilia Orozco and Sergio Orozco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 13330 Kyle Dr. Moreno Valley, CA 92553
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 5/1/18 EH
  Docket 41
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Cecilia Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sergio Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Cecilia Orozco and Sergio Orozco
  
  Chapter 13
  U.S. BANK NATIONAL Represented By Andrew Kussmaul Christina J O
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15893
  
  Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 26025 Willow Street, Hemet, CA 92544
  
  MOVANT: WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 25
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 5/10/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Joseph Manuel Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts
  Movant(s):
  Wilmington Trust, National Represented By Maria Tsagaris Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-16683
  
  Salvador Caridad Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Ford Fusion, VIN: 3FA6P0HRXDR236224
  
  MOVANT: AMERICAN CREDIT ACCEPTANCE LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 54
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Salvador Caridad Rodriguez Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Movant(s):
  American Credit Acceptance LLC Represented By
  Jennifer H Wang
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Salvador Caridad Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12101
  
  Anagabriela Perez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Corolla, VIN JTDBU4EE2DJ122450
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Anagabriela Perez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12949
  
  Lenton Hutton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 13370 Seagull Dr, Victorville, CA 92392
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Late
  
  Pursuant to the operation of 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4)(A)(i), no automatic stay went into effect in the instant case, and, therefore, Movant’s requests for relief to the automatic stay, to the extent that in rem relief is not requested, are DENIED as moot, although the order may make clear there is no stay in effect by virtue of § 362(c)(4)(A)(i).
  
  Regarding Movant’s request for in rem relief from the automatic stay, the Court is inclined to DENY the requests for lack of cause shown. The entire basis for Movant’s request is that the instant case has been filed in bad faith due to two previous Chapter 13 filings in the five months preceding this petition. The docket reflects that each of the two previous cases were filed by the same attorney, Brian Nomi. The first case was dismissed for failure to file required information and the second case was dismissed at the confirmation hearing due to failure to appear at the meeting of creditors. At the time of the second dismissal, the Court imposed a 180-day refiling bar.
  
  Subsequent to the second dismissal, Debtor retained new counsel, Christopher Hewitt. Mr. Hewitt subsequently moved for relief from the second dismissal order in so far as the order contained a re-filing bar. The Court granted that request, and, on April 10,
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Lenton Hutton
  
  Chapter 13
  2018, Debtor filed a third Chapter 13 case using the services of Mr. Hewitt.
  
  Given the circumstances surrounding the previous two dismissals and the fact that Debtor has not sought to impose the automatic stay, the Court declines to infer that the instant bankruptcy filing evidences bad faith to support the requested in rem relief.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Lenton Hutton Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12969
  
  Richard H Enstad
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Mitsubishi Outlander, VIN JA4AP3AU6HZ069327
  
  MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 6
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
  (1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Richard H Enstad Represented By Michael L Kellogg
  Movant(s):
  TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Richard H Enstad
  
  Chapter 7
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13216
  
  Alexander Tofick David
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1521 Latham St., Colton CA 92324
  
  MOVANT: ALEXANDER TOFICK DAVID
  
  EH
  
  Docket 15
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, continuing the automatic stay as to Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC only. The Court is inclined to DENY the motion to the extent it seeks to continue the automatic stay as to all creditors because Abbyfield Properties LP had a pending motion for relief from the automatic stay in the previous case, and does not appear to have been served pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004. Furthermore, Debtor has not presented clear and convincing evidence adequate to overcome the presumption of bad faith as to Abbyfield Properties LP.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Alexander Tofick David Represented By Brad Weil
  Movant(s):
  Alexander Tofick David Represented By Brad Weil
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Alexander Tofick David
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13219
  
  Patrick Merrill and Gayle Merrill
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 232 Ohio St, Lake Elsinore CA 92530
  
  MOVANT: 2ND CHANCE MORTGAGE INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  Pursuant to Local Rule 4001-1(c)(1)(C)(iv), service is required upon "the holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property that is known to the movant, scheduled by the debtor, or appears in the public record." Here, Movant is the junior lienholder on the subject property, yet has not served the senior lienholder with the instant motion. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the motion for service on the first mortgagee, Selection Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Patrick Merrill Represented By Jeremiah D Raxter
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Gayle Merrill Represented By
  Jeremiah D Raxter
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Patrick Merrill and Gayle Merrill
  
  Chapter 7
  2nd Chance Mortgages Inc. Represented By Henry D Paloci
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-19993
  
  B & B Family, Incorporated
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #10.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 12/13/16, 3/7/17, 5/30/17, 7/25/17, 9/26/17, 10/31/17, 11/7/17
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10939
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #11.00 Motion for Order Approving Payment of Mediation Fee From Debtor-in- Possession Account
  
  EH
  
  Docket 56
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/15/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On February 7, 2018, Vance Johnson ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On February 27, 2018, the Court approved Debtor’s application to employ Goe & Forsythe, LLP ("Counsel") as bankruptcy counsel.
  
  On May 1, 2018, Joana Johnson ("Joana"), Debtor’s ex-wife, filed a proof of claim in the amount of $6,134,701.47 ("Claim 8"), of which $1,144,497.36 was identified as entitled to priority, and $309,233.74 was identified as secured by certain real property in Temecula, California. On May 7, 2018, Joana filed a complaint against Debtor to determine her interest in, and compel turnover of, certain funds held in Counsel’s client trust account.
  
  On April 24, 2018, Debtor filed the instant motion seeking Court approval of the payment of the mediation fee from the DIP account.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  
  The Court supports the parties pursuit of a solution through mediation, and, in the absence of any opposition, is inclined to GRANT the motion pursuant to the two issues below.
  
  First, it not clear why the parties have not sought to defray costs by utilizing the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California’s Mediation Program.
  
  Second, the motion states that the parties "have preliminarily agreed to a $7,500 cap on the fee for the mediation, which Debtor and Joana have agreed to split evenly." Nevertheless, the motion also states that "Debtor requests authority to pay Debtor’s portion of the mediation from Debtor’s debtor-in-possession account up to the amount of $5,000." It is unclear whether the two quoted sections evidence an oversight on the part of the Debtor or Counsel or whether the discrepancy reflects an anticipation that the preliminary cap will be exceeded.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 11
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11327
  
  Latoya Joy Armstrong
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 Motion Of United States Trustee For An Order To Show Cause Why John Alarcon Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11 U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020
  
  Also #12 EH
  Docket 13
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Latoya Joy Armstrong Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10761
  
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 7 to 13 Also #9
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By James P Doan
  Movant(s):
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By James P Doan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-10141
  
  Shawn Michel Smigel
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation Also #7
  EH
  
  Docket 58
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Shawn Michel Smigel Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Julie Philippi Todd L Turoci
  11:00 AM
  6:15-21418
  
  James Lloyd Walker
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #4.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 4/11/18
  Also #8 EH
  Docket 102
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  James Lloyd Walker Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
  11:00 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 CONT Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 between Trustee and Dr. Eric L. Freedman
  
  From: 5/11/16, 6/8/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 10/5/16, 11/9/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18
  
  Also #11 EH
  Docket 322
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/11/2016
  
  Based on the representations made to the Court by counsel for the Parties that negotiations are ongoing, and based on the consent of the Parties to a continuance, the Court shall CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to June 8, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
  
  APPEARANCES ARE WAIVED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:00 AM
  6:13-17565
  
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #6.00 Motion to Sell Property of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens under Section 363(f)
  
  Also #10 EH
  Docket 49
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED/TRAILED TO 5/16/18 AT 11:30 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
  Movant(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
  11:30 AM
  6:17-10141
  
  Shawn Michel Smigel
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation Also #3
  EH
  
  Docket 58
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  05/16/18
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professional, the following administrative claims will be allowed:
  
  Trustee Fees:
  $ 3,250
  Trustee Expenses:
  $ 88.78
  Attorney Fees:
  $8,960
  Attorney Costs:
  $141.30
  
  The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professional may submit on the tentative.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Shawn Michel Smigel Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  11:30 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Shawn Michel Smigel
  
  Chapter 7
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Julie Philippi Todd L Turoci
  11:30 AM
  6:15-21418
  
  James Lloyd Walker
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #8.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 4/11/18
  Also #4 EH
  Docket 102
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 11:00 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  James Lloyd Walker Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Franklin C Adams Cathy Ta
  11:30 AM
  6:18-10761
  
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 7 to 13 Also #2
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER CONVERTING CASE TO CHAPTER 13 ENTERED 5/15/16
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By James P Doan
  Movant(s):
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By James P Doan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:30 AM
  6:13-17565
  
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #10.00 Motion to Sell Property of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens under Section 363(f)
  
  Also #6 EH
  Docket 49
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  05/16/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On April 27, 2013, Bertrand Tenke Kengni ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. Helen Frazer is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate is an interest in real property located at 813 North Campus Ave (the "Property").
  
  On April 18, 2018, the Trustee filed her Motion to Sell Property of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens (the "Motion").
  
  Service of the Motion was proper as to the Debtor, Carisa Kengni and Fernando Pearson, as well as all creditors, and no opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  Sale of Estate Property Pursuant to Section 363(b)
  The trustee, after notice and a hearing, may sell property of the estate. 11
  U.S.C. § 363(b)(1); see also Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub, 471
  U.S. 343, 352 (1985). The sale must be in the best interests of the estate and the price must be fair and reasonable. In re Canyon Partnership, 55 B.R. 520 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1985); see also In re Wilde Horse Enterprises, Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991)(sale must have fair/reasonable price, accurate/reasonable notice to creditors and sale made in good faith). The trustee must articulate some "business
  11:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni
  
  Chapter 7
  justification" for selling estate property out of the "ordinary course of business" before the court may approve the transaction. In re Lionel Corp., 722 F.2d 1063, 1071 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Ernst Home Ctr., Inc., 209 B.R. 974, 979 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1997). Objections to sale that are based on inadequacy of price are often resolved the court ordering an auction, which may occur in open court. Simantrob v. Claims Prosecutor, LLC (In re Lahijani), 325 B.R. 282, 287 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 6004(f).1
  
  In support of the proposed sale to Yuefu Yu and Yi Zhao (collectively, "Buyers"), the Trustee sets forth the following figures and analysis:
  
  Sale Price
  $365,000
  Ditech
  $189,000
  Debtor’s Claim of Exemption
  $19,621.59
  
  Closing Costs (8%, including 6% broker commission) $29,378.41 Net Equity for the Estate: $127,000
  
  Based on these figures, the proposed sale to Purchaser appears reasonable and the Trustee’s business justification for the sale warrants granting of the Motion.
  1. Bidding Procedures
    
    Generally, bidding procedures must be untainted by self-dealing, encourage bidding and be fair/reasonable/serve the best interests of the estate. See In re Crown Corp., 679 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1982). Here, the Trustee has proposed bidding procedures which require an initial overbid of $1,000 above the proposed purchase
    11:30 AM
    CONT...
    
    Bertrand Tenke Kengni
    
    Chapter 7
    price of $365,000, with each additional bid in increments of $1,000, and a deposit of
    $7,500 provided to the Trustee 5 days prior to the sale. The Trustee’s proposed bidding procedures are reasonable and encourage bidding and are therefore approved.
  2. Sale Made in Good Faith
    
    The proposed sale has been brought in good faith and has been negotiated on an "arms- length" basis. The court, in Wilde Horse Enterprises, set forth the factors in considering whether a transaction is in good faith. The court stated:
    
    ‘Good faith’ encompasses fair value, and further speaks to the integrity of the transaction. Typical ‘bad faith’ or misconduct, would include collusion between the seller and buyer, or any attempt to take unfair advantage of other potential purchasers. And, with respect to making such determinations, the
    court and creditors must be provided with sufficient information to allow them to take a position on the proposed sale.
    
    Id. at 842 (citations omitted).
    
    Here, the Trustee marketed the Property via her Broker, Neiman Realty, which marketed the Property. The Buyers’ all cash offer is the highest and best offer received by the Trustee since listing the Property in the winter of 2017. (Trustee Decl.
    ¶9). The sale appears to be made in good faith.
  3. Sale Free and Clear of non-Debtor Interests
  A trustee may sell estate property "free and clear" of third party interests in the property, such as co-ownership interest, liens, claims and encumbrances. See 11
  U.S.C. § 363(f). A sale free and clear of third party interests pursuant to section 363 is authorized only if one of the following conditions is met: (1) sale authorized by applicable nonbankruptcy law; (2) third party whose interest will be affected consents;
  1. the affected interest is a lien and the sale price is greater than total value of all liens on the property; (4) the affected interest is a bona fide dispute; or (5) the third party whose interest will be affected could be compelled to accept a money
    11:30 AM
    CONT...
    
    Bertrand Tenke Kengni
    
    Chapter 7
    satisfaction of the interest. 11 U.S.C. § 363(f)(1)-(5).
    
    Here, the Trustee seeks a sale free and clear of any interest of Carisa Kengni’s nephew, Fernando Pearson Jr. ("Pearson"), to whom she attempted to transfer, post- petition, an interest in the Property. The Trustee’s Declaration sufficiently details that there are bona fide disputes as to any interest that could be asserted by either Carisa Kengni or Pearson because the attempted transfers of interests in the Property postpetition likely constitute avoidable postpetition transfers. Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to grant the request to sell the Property free and clear of the non- Debtor interests of Carisa Kengni (already resolved via 9019) and of any interest held by Pearson.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as follows:
    1. Approving the sale of the Property to the Buyers or successful overbidder;
    2. Providing that the Trustee is authorized and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the estate any and all documents as reasonably may be necessary to implement the terms of the proposed sale;
    3. Providing that the notice given by the Trustee in connection with the sale and hearing thereon is adequate, sufficient, proper and complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure;
    4. Approving the overbid procedures;
    5. Approving payment of the Ditech deed of trust and any unpaid property taxes from escrow;
    6. Approving payment of a 6% Broker’s commission at close without further order;
    7. Authorizing the sale of the Property free and clear of any interest of Pearson;
    8. Authorizing Trustee to pay Debtor his allowed exemption; and
    9. Waiving the 14-day stay prescribed by rule 6004(h) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
  Finally, the Court does not make a good faith finding at this time because no
  11:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni
  
  Chapter 7
  declaration was filed by the Buyers establishing their lack of relationship to interested parties. The Court shall permit a supplemental declaration to be filed prior to entry of the order at which time the Court can approve the Buyers as Good Faith Buyers under
  §363(m).
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bertrand Tenke Kengni Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
  Movant(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se
  11:30 AM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #11.00 CONT Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 between Trustee and Dr. Eric L. Freedman
  
  From: 5/11/16, 6/8/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 10/5/16, 11/9/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18
  
  Also #5 EH
  Docket 322
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/11/2016
  
  Based on the representations made to the Court by counsel for the Parties that negotiations are ongoing, and based on the consent of the Parties to a continuance, the Court shall CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to June 8, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
  
  APPEARANCES ARE WAIVED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:30 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  11:30 AM
  6:18-11327
  
  Latoya Joy Armstrong
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #12.00 Motion Of United States Trustee For An Order To Show Cause Why John Alarcon Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11 U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020
  
  Also #1 EH
  Docket 13
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") moves this Court for an order to show cause why John Alarcon ("Alarcon"), bankruptcy petition preparer, should not be held in contempt of Court. Service of the Motion appears proper and no opposition has been filed.
  
  In support, the UST has provided evidence that Alarcon previously committed violations of §110 while performing BPP services and was eventually enjoined from performing BPP services in February 2017 by Judge Clarkson for his failure to comply with prior orders (the "Injunction Order"). Despite that injunction and Alarcon’s failure to seek to lift the injunction, the UST has provided evidence that Alarcon aided the Debtor in the instant case in the filing of her bankruptcy petition.
  The evidence sufficiently demonstrates Alarcon has been performing BPP services in violation of the Injunction Order.
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and issue an order to show cause why Alarcon should not be held in contempt.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. UST to lodge a proposed order to show cause re: contempt within 7 days.
  11:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Latoya Joy Armstrong
  Party Information
  
  Chapter 7
  Latoya Joy Armstrong Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani
  Trustee(s):
  Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al
  
  #13.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding For Failure To State A Claim Also #14
  EH
  
  Docket 6
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/16/2018
  BACKGROUND
  On December 8, 2017, Mark Bastourous and Bernadette Shenouda (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants) filed their petition for chapter 7 relief.
  
  On March 12, 2018, Mona and Rafet Gerges and St. Mary Properties, LLC (collectively, Plaintiffs") filed their complaint for dischargeability determination under
  §§ 523(a)(2), (a)(4), and (a)(6) and for a finding of Alter Ego liability and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs (the "Complaint"). The Complaint alleges generally that the Plaintiffs made loans in the original amount of $540,000 plus interest at 1.66% every six months (the "Advances") to Defendants’ wholly owned entity, MRM Investment Group Inc. ("MRM") and by deposits with Defendants’ wholly owned corporate entity Professional Investment Group, LLC ("PIG"), secured by real property located at 2311
  S. 6th Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006 (the "Arcadia Property"). Plaintiffs further allege as follows:
  1. Plaintiffs interest in the Arcadia Property was secured by a Deed of Trust recorded May 4, 2015 (Compl. ¶10)
  2. A Deed of Trust in favor of the Bleeker Family Trust was recorded on April 20, 2016, securing a note in the principal amount of $735,000 (Compl. ¶11);
  3. A Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale following a foreclosure sale was recorded on January 10, 2017 (Id.);
  4. On March 5, 2017, the Bleeker Family Trust sold the Arcadia Property for
    $880,000 to recover indebtedness due of $869,428.05 (Id.);
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Mark Bastorous
  5. Plaintiffs made the Advances to fund the remodeling of the Arcadia Property so that it would be fixed and flipped at a profit, from which Plaintiff would be paid on the Maturity Date (Compl. ¶12);
  6. Plaintiff in a senior priority position to the Bleeker Family Trust, was not paid any amount from the proceeds (Compl. ¶13);
  7. Plaintiffs made Advances to Defendant because they knew them and trusted them (Compl. ¶14);
  8. In or about November 15, 2015, after the last of the Advances was made to Defendants, Defendants admitted to Plaintiffs that the Advances were not secured by the Arcadia Property (Compl. ¶15);
  9. Defendant further represented to Plaintiff that an attorney, Marian Bishay (SBN 195315), would form a new corporation for them, to be known as St. Mary Properties, LLC ("St.Mary"), and that St. Mary would enter into a new promissory note with Defendant, secured by a different property owned by Defendant (Compl. ¶16);
  10. Defendant further represented to Plaintiff that they would enter into a Secured Promissory Note and Profit Participation Agreement ("Secured Note") in the original amount of $552,000, with a deed of trust recorded in a third position on an office building in Santa Ana, located at 1665 E 4th Street, Santa Ana, CA ("Office Property").
    
    Chapter 7
  11. On November 15, 2015, Plaintiff executed a Deed of Trust and Assignment of Rents ("Deed of Trust"), in which it is stated it is to secure performance under a promissory note, dated as of June 28, 2015, by and between St. Mary Properties, LLC, on the one hand, and PIG, on the other hand (Compl. ¶18);
  12. The Office Property was later foreclosed by a senior lender (Compl. ¶22);
  13. The Articles of Organization for St Mary were not filed until August 6, 2016, or nine months after the Deed of Trust was executed (Compl. ¶21).
  On April 14, 2018, Debtors filed their Motion to Dismiss the Complaint ("Motion"). The Plaintiffs opposed the Motion on May 2, 2018 ("Opposition") and Debtors filed their reply to the Opposition on May 9, 2018. Service is not at issue.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Civil Rule 12(b)(6) standards
  Under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), made applicable in adversary proceedings through
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Rule 7012, a bankruptcy court may dismiss a complaint if it fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." In reviewing a Civil Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the trial court must accept as true all facts alleged in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir.
  2001). However, the trial court need not accept as true conclusory allegations in a complaint or legal characterizations cast in the form of factual allegations. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555–56, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007);
  Hartman v. Gilead Scis., Inc. (In re Gilead Scis. Sec. Litig.), 536 F.3d 1049, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).
  
  To avoid dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must aver in the complaint "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173
  L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). It is axiomatic that a claim cannot be plausible when it has no legal basis. A dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) may be based either on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or on the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory. Johnson
  v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008).
  
  Rule 9(b)
  Allegations regarding fraud are subject to a heightened pleading standard.
  Civil Rule 9(b), made applicable to adversary proceedings by Rule 7009, requires that a plaintiff must state "with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. " The
  Ninth Circuit has provided guidance for the "with particularity" requirement by stating that to comport with Civil Rule 9(b) the complaint must (1) specify the averred fraudulent representations; (2) aver the representations were false when made; (3) identify the speaker; (4) state when and where the statements were made; and (5) state the manner in which the representations were false and misleading. Lancaster Cmty.
  Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d 397, 405 (9th Cir.1991).
  
  Because fraud encompasses a wide variety of circumstances, the requirements of Civil Rule 9(b)—like Civil Rule 8(a)(2)—should provide all defendants with sufficient information to formulate a response. Therefore, the complaint cannot lump multiple defendants together but must "inform each defendant separately of the allegations surrounding [its] alleged participation in the fraud." Swartz v. KPMB LLP, 476 F.3d 756, 764–65 (9th Cir. 2007).
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  
  However, in Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d 616, 627 (9th Cir.1997), the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that "[e]very transaction alleged to be fraudulent does not have to be detailed in the complaint." Instead, the Rule 9(b) requirement is satisfied where the Complaint sets forth an explanation as to why the transactions were false or misleading. See Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d at 625; see also In re Dreier LLP, 453
  B.R. 499, 508-09 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011) ("Under appropriate circumstances, multiple transactions will be collapsed and treated as steps in a single transaction for analysis under the fraudulent conveyance laws.").
  1. CLAIM I : FRAUD UNDER §523(a)(2)
    The Defendants assert that the claim for fraud is insufficiently stated. The Court agrees.
    
    In order to maintain a claim for actual fraud, the plaintiff must provide sufficient factual content from which a court can derive that:
    1. the debtor made the representations; (2) that at the time he knew they were false; (3) that he made them with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (4) that the creditor relied on such representations, and (5) that the creditor sustained the alleged loss and damage as the proximate result of the representations having been made.
      In re Taylor, 514 F.2d 1370, 1373 (9th Cir.1975)
      
      Allegations regarding fraud are subject to a heightened pleading standard.
      Civil Rule 9(b), made applicable to adversary proceedings by Rule 7009, requires that a plaintiff must state "with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. " The
      Ninth Circuit has provided guidance for the "with particularity" requirement by stating that to comport with Civil Rule 9(b) the complaint must (1) specify the averred fraudulent representations; (2) aver the representations were false when made; (3) identify the speaker; (4) state when and where the statements were made; and (5) state the manner in which the representations were false and misleading. Lancaster Cmty.
      Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d 397, 405 (9th Cir.1991).
      
      Because fraud encompasses a wide variety of circumstances, the requirements
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Mark Bastorous
      
      Chapter 7
      of Civil Rule 9(b)—like Civil Rule 8(a)(2)—should provide all defendants with sufficient information to formulate a response. Therefore, the complaint cannot lump multiple defendants together but must "inform each defendant separately of the allegations surrounding [its] alleged participation in the fraud." Swartz v. KPMB LLP, 476 F.3d 756, 764–65 (9th Cir. 2007).
      
      In the Complaint, Plaintiffs imply misrepresentations were made but do not identify which Debtor made the misrepresentations, when and where the statements were made or the manner in which the statements were misleading. It is, for example, asserted in the Opposition that a Defendant (though it is not clear which one) represented that the Advances would be secured by the Arcadia Property. (Opp’n at 2). However, the Complaint does not actually state that a representation was made regarding the debt being secured. Instead, the Complaint states generically that the "Note, was to be secured by a deed of trust". The Complaint then goes on to state that the Note was recorded on May 4, 2015, and also provides an instrument number. (Compl. at ¶11). The Complaint later indicates that Defendant (again, it is not clear which Defendant) admitted that the Advances were not secured by the Arcadia Property. (Compl. at ¶15). The series of allegations is confusing as to what the Plaintiffs understood was happening and what misrepresentations were made by the Defendants, even in a general sense. Similarly, as to the Office Property, it is not clear what, if any misrepresentation occurred, and if a misrepresentation occurred, how such misrepresentation caused a loss to the Plaintiffs where a senior lender was the one to foreclose on the Office Property.
      
      If, for example, the Plaintiffs had alleged that Defendant Bastouros stated he would record the Deed of Trust on behalf of the Plaintiffs and then failed to do so, which ultimately resulted in Plaintiffs losing their investment when the Property was foreclosed, that statement would constitute a misrepresentation. However, here, there is basically no misrepresentation alleged. Nor is it clear how the foreclosure by the senior lender as to the Office Property was caused by any fraud or misrepresentation of the Defendants.
      
      The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to the First Claim and dismiss with leave to amend.
  2. CLAIM II: FRAUD OR DEFALCATION WHILE ACTING IN A
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Mark Bastorous
    FIDUCIARY CAPACITY, EMBEZZLEMENT OR LARCENY
    Section 523(a)(4) provides in relevant part that a discharge under section 727
    
    Chapter 7
    does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, or larceny. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4).
    
    First, whether a relationship is a "fiduciary" one within the meaning of section 523(a)(4) is a question of federal law. Ragsdale v. Haller, 780 F.2d 794, 795 (9th Cir.1986). The broad, general definition of "fiduciary" is inapplicable in the dischargeability context. Id. at 796. Instead, the fiduciary relationship must be one arising from an express or technical trust that was imposed before and without reference to the wrongdoing that caused the debt. Id. Here, there is no express trust or trust res as required for a finding of fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity. See id. In their Opposition, the Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants acted in an investment-advisory capacity for the Plaintiffs and then cite to a case indicating that a real estate broker is a fiduciary under § 523(a)(4). (Opp’n at 6). The Opposition’s legal authority and argument do not cure the failure of the Complaint to allege that an investment-advisory relationship existed between the parties nor does the Opposition provide legal authority for the proposition that the relationship between the parties created a financial advisor relationship or that such relationship would constitute a fiduciary relationship under § 523(a)(4). The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to the Second Claim and dismiss with leave to amend. Finally, the Court concurs that because larceny and embezzlement are neither alleged nor addressed in the Opposition, to the extent the Plaintiffs sought relief on these grounds, the Court is also inclined to GRANT as to these two grounds.
  3. CLAIM III: WILLFUL AND MALICIOUS INJURY
    Section 523(a)(6) provides in relevant part that a discharge under section 727 does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) (6).
    
    First, for an injury to be willful, the debtor must have a subjective motive to inflict injury or must believe that injury is substantially certain to occur as a result of his or her conduct. Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich), 238 F.3d 1202, 1208 (9th Cir. 2001). In other words, the debtor must have acted with "actual knowledge that harm to the creditor was substantially certain" to result. In re Su, 290 F.3d at 1146; Ditto v.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Mark Bastorous
    
    Chapter 7
    McCurdy, 510 F .3d 1070, 1078 n. 8 (9th Cir. 2007).
    
    In addition to the willfulness requirement, a claim under § 523(a)(6) requires that the injury be caused with malice. See Su at 1146-47. A ‘malicious' injury involves
    (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse. Id. (internal citations omitted).
    
    Here, as explained in SECTION I regarding the fraud claim, the Complaint has inadequately alleged actions or misrepresentations by the Defendants to establish a plausible claim that Defendants acted willfully and maliciously. The Complaint in its current form establishes little more than that Defendants induced Plaintiffs to loan them money in order to flip houses.
    
    The Opposition indicates that the Defendants induced Plaintiff to record a reconveyance so that the Plaintiffs could induce another victim to loan money on the representations of sufficient equity in the Arcadia Property. Such allegations would be more supportive of Plaintiffs’ claims. However, these facts were not alleged in the Complaint. The Complaint is vague as to why the reconveyance occurred. If the Defendant made a misrepresentation to Plaintiffs to induce them to reconvey the Deed of Trust on the Arcadia Property then Rule 9 compels Plaintiffs to set these allegations forth in the Complaint.
    
    Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to the Third Claim for Relief.
  4. CLAIM IV and V: ALTER EGO AND ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
  The sole argument by Defendants to support dismissal of the Fourth and Fifth Claims for relief is that they seek substantive relief which is not available in a nondischargeability action. The Ninth Circuit has held that a bankruptcy court may enter a monetary judgment on a disputed state law claim in the course of determining that the debt is nondischargeable. Cowen v. Kennedy (In re Kennedy), 108 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir.1997). Shawn Deitz v. Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford (In re Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford), 469 B.R. 11, 21 (9th Cir. BAP 2012), aff'd, 760 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir.
  2014).
  Based on the foregoing, the Defendants have failed to establish that substantive claims specifically related to dischargeability complaints cannot be
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  brought in the bankruptcy court. Nonetheless, the Motion is GRANTED as to the Fourth and Fifth Claims with leave to amend on the sole basis that the Court has granted the Motion as to the First through Third Claims for relief as the Fourth and Fifth Claims cannot stand alone.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion dismissing the Complaint in its entirety with leave to amend.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Movant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mona Gerges Represented By
  Louis J Esbin
  Rafet Gerges Represented By
  Louis J Esbin
  St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al
  
  #14.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury
  
  From: 5/9/18 Also #13
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mona Gerges Represented By
  Louis J Esbin
  Rafet Gerges Represented By
  Louis J Esbin
  St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al
  
  #15.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding EH
  Docket 3
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/16/2018
  Plaintiff, having filed an Amended Complaint on May 3, 2018, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Movant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Anis Khalil Represented By
  Wayne W Suojanen
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al
  
  #16.00 Defendant and Non-Debtor Mike Bareh's Motion to Dismiss Complaint EH
  Docket 7
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 4/18/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se
  Mike Bareh Represented By
  Mirco J Haag
  MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Movant(s):
  Mike Bareh Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Mirco J Haag
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey
  Chun-Wu Li Represented By
  Douglas L Mahaffey
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-20092
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al
  
  #17.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding EH
  Docket 3
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/16/2018
  Plaintiff, having filed an Amended Complaint on May 3, 2018, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Defendant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Movant(s):
  Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
  Bernadette Shenouda Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Mark Bastorous
  
  Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mina Farah Represented By
  Wayne W Suojanen
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich
  2:00 PM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01021 Cisneros v. Ganahl Lumber Company, A California Corporation
  
  #18.00 CONT Status Conference re Complaint by Arturo Cisneros against Ganahl Lumber Company, A California Corporation for Avoidance Of Fradulent Transfers; Recovery Of Avoided Transfer; Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer and other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
  
  From: 3/21/18 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Defendant(s):
  Ganahl Lumber Company, A Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Plaintiff(s):
  Arturo Cisneros Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  William A. Mendez, II
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  2:00 PM
  6:15-14230
  
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01085 PRINGLE v. Winn et al
  
  #19.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01085. Complaint by JOHN P PRINGLE against Ralph Winn. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). and other Defendants including DOES 1-25 Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13-Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer, 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property,14 - Recovery of money/property - other, 91- Declaratory judgment)
  
  From: 7/12/17, 8/23/17, 10/25/17 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
  Defendant(s):
  Ralph Winn Represented By
  Douglas A Plazak
  Sterling Security Service, Inc. Represented By Seth W Wiener
  Natalia V Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener
  Steven B Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener
  Stacy Winn Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Home Security Stores, Inc.
  
  Douglas A Plazak
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  JOHN P PRINGLE Represented By Charity J Miller Robert P Goe
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Miller
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27611
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD
  
  #20.00 Motion to Dismiss and/or Motion to Strike EH
  Docket 90
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/16/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  On October 25, 2013, Douglas Jay Roger ("Debtor" or "Defendant") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. On September 22, 2014, Revere Financial Corporation ("Revere") and Jerry Wang ("Receiver") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint for determination of the dischargeability of debts pursuant to §§ 523(a)(2)(B), 523(a) (2)(A), 523(a)(4)(A), 523(a)(4) & 523(a)(6); and objecting to the Debtor’s discharge pursuant to §§727(a)(3), 727(a)(4)(A), 727(a)(4)(B), 727(a)(5), & 727(a)(7)
  ("Complaint" or "Dischargeability Action").
  
  On October 6, 2014, the Debtor filed a Motion to Dismiss, to Strike, and for a More Definite Statement (the "MTD"). After numerous hearings on the merits of the Complaint, followed by numerous months of joint stipulations between the parties to continue the hearing for settlement discussions, an order granting in part and denying in part the MTD was entered on December 20, 2017. On February 20, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint (the "FAC"). On March 14 and 21, the parties stipulated to a continuance and extension of time for Defendant to respond to the FAC. On April 24, 2018, the Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike the FAC (the "Motion"). Plaintiffs filed Opposition to the Motion on May 2, 2018. On the same date, the Trustee for the Douglas J. Roger MD. Inc. ("DJRI") bankruptcy filed a joinder to the Plaintiffs’ Opposition ("Opposition"). The Defendant filed his reply on May 10, 2018 ("Reply").
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  DISCUSSION
  1. Dismissal pursuant to Rule 8
    The Defendant asserts that dismissal is warranted because the First Amended Complaint violates Rule 8 in that Plaintiffs fail to provide a short and plain statement of the claims. Instead, Defendant argues that the FAC is "filled with subordinate clauses and contains extensive elaboration and superfluous details that make it non- compliant with the provisions of [Rule 8]." (Mot. at 7:12-16).
    
    In response to Defendant’s argument, Plaintiff correctly cites to Hearns v. San Bernardino Police Dep't, 530 F.3d 1124, 1131 (9th Cir. 2008). In Hearns, the Ninth Circuit extensively discusses cases in which dismissals under Rule 8 have been upheld:
    - Not only was the first complaint at issue in that case lengthy; it set out its claims in two sentences, which comprised 30 lines, without specifying which of the 20 named defendants were liable for which claims … We affirmed the district court's dismissal of the final amended complaint, which we described as ‘argumentative, prolix, replete with redundancy, and largely irrelevant’ (McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir.1996));
    - In Nevijel v. North Coast Life Ins. Co., 651 F.2d 671, 671 (9th Cir.1981), we upheld a Rule 8(a) dismissal of a 48–page complaint that contained an additional 23 pages of addenda and exhibits. The complaint was characterized as " ‘verbose, confusing and almost entirely conclusory.’ " Id. at 674;
    - In Schmidt v. Herrmann, 614 F.2d 1221, 1224 (9th Cir.1980), the complaint was 30 pages long. It was "impossible to designate the cause or causes of action attempted to be alleged in the complaint." 614 F.2d at 1223. The complaint was described as a "confusing statement of a non- existing cause of action" and as "confusing, distracting, ambiguous, and unintelligible";
    - The Ninth Circuit further indicated that two older cases, Gillibeau v. City of Richmond, 417 F.2d 426, 431–32 (9th Cir.1969) and Agnew v. Moody, 330 F.2d 868, 870–71 (9th Cir.1964), narrowly permit dismissal under Rule 8(a)(2) where a complaint is "so verbose, confused and redundant that its true substance, if any, is well disguised"
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Douglas Jay Roger
      Here, the Court initially notes that Defendant fails to point to any specific
      
      Chapter 7
      portions of the FAC which support a finding that the allegations are so verbose, confused or redundant as to conceal the true substance of the Plaintiff’s claims or that dismissal is otherwise warranted under Rule 8(a) or (d). Nor does the Court’s review of the FAC raise any concerns that the Defendant could be confused about what claims are being alleged against him. Finally, the Defendant fails to distinguish Hearns or otherwise provide binding caselaw to support his Rule 8 arguments. The Court is inclined to DENY the request for dismissal under Rule 8 and declines to strike any portion of the FAC.
  2. Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute, Rule 41(b)
    Defendant seeks dismissal asserting that Plaintiffs have failed in their duty to diligently prosecute the action, and Debtor has been prejudiced by their delay. (Mot. at 5:15-17).
    
    In response, Plaintiffs primarily point out that the Defendant expressly requested and/or agreed to several stipulations to continue the matters in the instant action. A review of the docket confirms that in most instances, Defendant has agreed affirmatively or tacitly to the continuances that he now asserts caused him prejudice. For example, in his declaration, Dr. Roger opines that the Court’s tentative ruling granting in part and denying in part his first Motion to Dismiss was issued on November 5, 2014, but that the order was not entered until December 20, 2017. (Roger Decl. ¶¶ 7-10). Defendant, however, glaringly ignores that he signed numerous stipulations continuing the final hearing on the Motion to Dismiss during that period. In fact, the final order (which was one approved as to form and content by all of the parties) illustrates that the Defendant consented to review of the final order by the other parties and to their approval prior to lodgment of the order. In this context, the Roger Declaration reveals itself to be a self-serving and misleading statement of the history of this case. Now the Court shall turn to the merits of the argument.
    
    A trial court is required to consider the following five factors in determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution: (1) the public's interest in expeditious resolutions of litigation, (2) the court's need to manage its docket, (3) the
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    
    Chapter 7
    risk of prejudice to defendants, (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits, and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. In re Osinga, 91 B.R. 893, 894 (9th BAP Cir. 1988).
    1. The Public’s Interest in Expeditious Resolutions of Litigation
      
      In support of the Motion, Defendant cites heavily to Osinga for the proposition that the Plaintiffs’ alleged ‘unreasonable’ delay in moving the case forward has prejudiced the Defendant and warrants dismissal. Defendant particularly underscores the fact that in a bankruptcy case, parties seeking to have their debts determined nondischargeable are required to "litigate their claims with reasonable promptitude." (Reply at 5)(citing Osinga at 895).
      
      In Osinga, the BAP noted that "defendants/appellees had seen no action and had heard nothing from the plaintiffs/appellants regarding [the] matter for twenty-nine months." Defendant appears to argue that the Osinga Panel’s decision rested heavily on the duty of the plaintiffs at all times to move the case forward. However, Osinga is distinguishable from the instant case because in Osinga, the discussion regarding the plaintiff’s duty to move a case forward was in the context of a record demonstrating a complete absence of any actions taken by plaintiff for a period of twenty-nine months. Additionally, Thompson v. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829 (9th Cir.1986) (cited in Osinga to support the proposition that delay caused by defendants does not obviate the possibility that dismissal may still be appropriate), involved a case in which neither side was prepared for trial. Thus, in Thompson, the fact that the defendant was not prepared did not relieve plaintiff from his separate obligation to prepare for trial (especially where plaintiff and defendant had been granted numerous continuances to prepare). The instant case is readily distinguishable. This is a case where there have been numerous stipulations signed by all of the parties, including Defendant, consenting to continuances and extensions of time. Moreover, the FAC reflects that the Dischargeability Action involves complex factual and legal issues related to the numerous adversary actions filed in the Roger and DJRI bankruptcy cases and it is not unreasonable to believe as indicated in the signed stipulations of the parties, that settlement negotiations have been ongoing for a
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Douglas Jay Roger
      
      Chapter 7
      lengthy period of time. Here, the Court does not find that Plaintiffs caused an unreasonable delay or that they failed in their duty to diligently prosecute the case. Thus, this factor weighs against granting of the Motion.
    2. The Court’s need to Manage its Docket
      
      The first two of the four policy considerations suggest that rule 41(b) is in large part a housekeeping measure related to the efficient administration of judicial business for the benefit of all litigants with cases pending. Nealey v. Transportacion Maritima Mexicana, S. A., 662 F.2d 1275, 1279 (9th Cir. 1980). As to this factor, the Court finds that permitting the action to move forward will not prejudice other litigants and as such this factor weighs against granting of the Motion.
    3. Risk of Prejudice to Defendants
      The plaintiff, of course, "has the ultimate burden of persuasion both as to the excuse for his own delay and as to lack of prejudice to the defendant." Nealey at 1280 (citing Larios v. Victory Carriers, Inc., 316 F.2d 63, 67 (2d Cir. 1963).
      
      (W)hen such a plaintiff has presented evidence excusing his own delay, he should (not) be automatically barred unless he also presents anticipatory evidence to negate prejudice on the part of the defendant, an issue as to which the defendant, with his greater knowledge, ought to be required to come forward.
      
      Id. As a threshold matter, the Court has already determined that the alleged delay has not been unreasonable and that given the consent of Defendant to numerous continuances, even if there was prejudice to Defendant, such prejudice was not caused by actions of the Plaintiffs.
      
      As to legal prejudice, the Defendant has provided evidence that he is unable to locate one of the witnesses that would have testified on his behalf - Mr. Gamboa, the original loan underwriter for 1st Centennial Bank. However, the Court finds there has not been actual prejudice stemming from the actions of Plaintiffs. In Nealey, the Court
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Douglas Jay Roger
      
      Chapter 7
      evaluated in a detailed manner whether actions by the plaintiffs could or would prejudice the defendants. Such analysis requires more detailed information regarding when the Defendant allegedly lost contact with Mr. Gamboa and whether Defendant made diligent efforts to keep in contact with his witnesses when he agreed to the numerous continuances that caused the delay in prosecution of the Dischargeability Action. As the Ninth Circuit held in Nealey, "the irretrievable loss of evidence may of course be … serious. Fairness dictates, however, that a plaintiff not be deprived of his cause of action if the missing evidence would have been lost even absent delay.
      Rather, the loss must in some way be causally related to the plaintiff's conduct." Nealey at 1281 (emphasis added). Here, the Court finds insufficient evidence that any specific conduct by Plaintiffs have caused actual prejudice with regard to Mr.
      Gamboa’s absence. Additionally, the Defendant has not indicated whether and to what extent other employees or former employees of 1st Centennial Bank may be able to testify on behalf of the Defendant.
      
      As to the remaining bases for prejudice alleged by Defendant, i.e., loss of income and reputation, the Court SUSTAINS the evidentiary objections of RFC. The Defendant’s assertions that the Dischargeability Action have caused him damage are without foundation, are speculative and constitute little more than unsupported conjecture on the part of Defendant. As such the Court strikes the Defendant’s statements as inadmissible. Alternatively, even assuming the Court were to credit the Defendant’s statements, the Defendant has not shown that actions by Plaintiffs have had a direct causal relationship to his loss of income and reputation.
      
      Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Defendant has failed to demonstrate legal prejudice causally related to any actions by Plaintiffs. This factor weighs against granting the Motion.
    4. Public Policy Favoring Disposition of Cases on their Merits
      
      Defendant does not address this factor. However, the Court finds that this factor weighs in favor of a decision on the merits and against granting of the Motion.
    5. Availability of Less Drastic Sanctions
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Douglas Jay Roger
    Defendant also does not address this factor. However, in the event the
    
    Chapter 7
    Defendant had been able to demonstrate legal prejudice causally related to Plaintiffs actions, various evidentiary sanctions and/or punitive monetary sanctions could have been considered. Dismissal, however, is an extreme sanction and given the consent of Defendant to numerous continuances, is wholly unwarranted in this case. This factor weighs against granting of the Motion.
    
    The Court, having evaluated all of the factors under Rule 41 finds that the weight of all factors favors denial of the Motion.
  3. Statute of Limitations and the Receiver’s Authority to File the Complaint
  Finally, Defendant complains that Receiver’s nunc pro tunc order authorizing the filing of a complaint in the bankruptcy court served to improperly circumvent the Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure because although he timely signed on to the timely Complaint that initiated this proceeding, he did not have authority from the State Court to file the action until well past the bankruptcy deadline for doing so. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that the argument is inartfully couched within the Rule 41 argument.
  
  "Nunc pro tunc signifies now for then, or in other words, a thing is done now, which shall have the same legal force and effect as if done at [the] time when it ought to have been done." United States v. Allen, 153 F.3d 1037, 1044 (9th Cir.1998) (quoting Black's Law Dictionary 964 (5th ed.1979)). The doctrine is considered part of the "inherent power of the court to make its records speak the truth." Id.
  
  Defendant does not dispute that original Complaint was timely filed and that the Receiver signed on to that Complaint. Instead, Defendant argues that because the
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Defendant did not have authority to file the initial Complaint under state law, at the time of the filing, that his participation in this case going forward cannot be cured by the State Court’s retroactive grant of authority. On this point, the Court agrees with the cases cited by Plaintiffs that the failure to obtain authority to sue is not a jurisdictional bar to filing. The In re Richards case cited by Defendant is unavailing on this point because it involves a bankruptcy local rule which the plaintiff had not complied with when the complaint was filed. 2 B.R. 219, 22 CBC 501 (BC MD NC 1980). In contrast, the Receiver’s authority to sue in this case involves state law and a nunc pro tunc order issued by the State Court. The Defendant now asks this Court to invalidate that order. However, if the Defendant disagreed with the State Court’s authority to issue nunc pro tunc relief, his recourse should have been to appeal or seek reconsideration of the State Court’s order. The legal argument that the Receiver’s action is untimely is not well-taken and the Defendant has not provided legal authority to support the proposition that this Court may now invalidate the State Court’s Nunc Pro Tunc Order.
  
  Finally, the Defendant’s arguments regarding the Receiver’s fees and expenses are incognizable. As such the Court need not reach this argument at this time. To the extent relief is requested as to the Defendant’s liability for Receiver’s fees and expenses, such relief is denied without prejudice.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  For the foregoing reasons, including for the reasons set forth by Plaintiffs’ and Trustee’s Opposition not here addressed, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion in its entirety.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Douglas Jay Roger
  
  Chapter 7
  Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Defendant(s):
  Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Movant(s):
  Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
  Plaintiff(s):
  Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
  Jerry Wang Represented By
  Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays
  Trustee(s):
  Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
  Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01303 Cisneros v. AMERICAN EXPRESS
  
  #21.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01303. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against AMERICAN EXPRESS. (Charge To Estate $350). For Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  AMERICAN EXPRESS Represented By Robert S Lampl Chad V Haes
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation
  
  #22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC CORPORATION, a California corporation, UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
  Summer M Shaw George Hanover
  LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By Summer M Shaw
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  George Hanover
  
  Chapter 7
  UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By Summer M Shaw George Hanover
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01309 Cisneros v. DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN
  
  #23.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01309. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential Transfer (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. Represented By
  Summer M Shaw
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:13-27344
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01308 Cisneros v. BWI CONSULTING, LLC et al
  
  #24.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01308. Complaint by
  A. Cisneros against BWI CONSULTING, LLC, Black and White, Inc., BLACK AND WHITE BILLING COMPANY, BLACK AND WHITE INK, MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))
  
  From: 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 7/27/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
  Defendant(s):
  BWI CONSULTING, LLC Pro Se
  Black and White, Inc. Pro Se
  BLACK AND WHITE BILLING Pro Se
  BLACK AND WHITE INK Pro Se
  MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  Plaintiff(s):
  A. Cisneros Represented By
  D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
  D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #25.00 CONT Motion for Summary Judgment Against Defendant Carolina Villalobos Navarro
  
  From: 4/25/18 Also #26 & #27 EH
  Docket 42
  Tentative Ruling:
  4/25/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On April 12, 2016, Jose Hernandez ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 7, 2016, the Chapter 7 Trustee ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Carolina Navarro ("Defendant") seeking the avoidance and recovery of a fraudulent transfer.
  After default was entered against Defendant, on October 14, 2016, the parties stipulated to set aside default, and, that same day, Defendant filed her answer. On March 1, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 4, 2018, Defendant filed her opposition.
  
  Plaintiff alleges that on July 21, 2014, Debtor transferred certain real property located at 3510 Duffy St., San Bernardino, CA 92407 to Defendant for no consideration and that Debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Defendant received a Chapter 7 discharge on January 26, 2018.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Violation of Discharge Injunction
    
    As a preliminary matter, Defendant argues that because she obtained her own discharge in January, the continuation of this proceeding violates her discharge injunction. Specifically, Defendant argues that her discharge extinguishes her personal liability and that Trustee’s complaint seeks avoidance of the transfer and recovery of the property or its value. Defendant’s opposition states:
    
    Notwithstanding his heightened knowledge of the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and bankruptcy jurisprudence, the Trustee has pursued the same claims and remedies against Defendant after her discharge was granted, relieving her of any personal liability on account of the Trustee’s alleged claims and barring the Trustee from obtaining relief in this case. For example, the Trustee seeks judgment on his Fifth Claim, which as pled in the Complaint, alleges that "Plaintiff is entitled to recovery the Subject Property or its value from the Defendant Pursuant to § 550(a)."
    [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 12-13].
    
    Defendant’s argument is misleading and lacks merit. Regardless of the relief requested in the complaint, which was filed before Defendant obtained a discharge, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment has dropped the reference to "or its value" and only seeks recovery of the subject property. Nothing in the motion for summary judgment seeks to enforce a personal liability of the Defendant. Therefore, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument.
  2. Motion for Summary Judgment
    
    Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    
    Chapter 7
    BANKR. P. 7056).
    
    The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324; see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(e). The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.
    
    If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).
    
    A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.
    
    Plaintiff requests summary judgment on the second claim for relief (avoidance of constructively fraudulent transfer) and the fifth claim for relief (recovery of avoided transfer). 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) states, in pertinent part:
    
    (a)(1) The trustee may avoid any transfer (including any transfer to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) of an interest of the debtor in property, or any obligation (including any obligation to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) incurred by the debtor, that was made or incurred on or within 2 years before the date of the filing of the petition, if the debtor voluntarily or involuntarily --
    
    (B)(i) received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for such transfer or obligation; and
    
    (ii)(I) was insolvent on the date that such transfer was made or such obligation was incurred, or became insolvent as a result of such
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    transfer or obligation
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Defendant does not dispute that there was a transfer of an interest of property within 2 years before the petition date. Defendant does, however, dispute the satisfaction of the other two elements, arguing that Defendant received reasonably equivalent value and was not rendered insolvent by the subject transfer. See generally In re Fruehauf Trailer Corp., 444 F.3d 203, 210 (3rd Cir. 2006); In re Southern Textile Knitters, 65 Fed. Appx. 426, 436 (4th Cir. 2003) (outlining elements of § 548(a)(1)(B) action).
    
    Regarding the requirement that reasonably equivalent value have been provided, Plaintiff asserts that the grant deed reflects that the transfer was a "bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return." In her opposition, Defendant argues that the language of the grant deed is inaccurate, and that she offered value in a variety of ways. Specifically, Defendant contends that she was a co-signer for the refinancing and "also provided consideration by contributing her wages to pay for household expenses and by providing domestic labor including cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, and running the parties’ household." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 17, lines 7-9]. With regard to the language on the grant deed, Defendant states that:
    
    The Grant Deed was not prepared by Debtor or Defendant. Debtor and Defendant correctly advised the loan officer who handled the refinancing that Defendant was not paying cash to Debtor for her one-half interest. For this reason, Debtor and Defendant believe the loan officer or escrow agent who prepared the Grant Deed noted on the document that the Transfer was a gift.
    [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 5, lines 1-5].
    
    In the reply, Plaintiff contends that "[a]fter first stating that it was a gift and nothing was received, the Debtor and Defendant should be estopped from now claiming it was not a gift and reasonably equivalent value was provided for the Subject Transfer." [Dkt. No. 51, pg. 4, lines 13-15].
    
    The Court concludes that the parol evidence rule applies here to preclude the consideration of evidence which contradicts the plain and unambiguous language of the deed. See generally In re Khalil, 2014 WL 1725811 at *6-11 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2014) (collecting cases providing comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule in the context of grant deeds deed). As was noted in Khalil:
    If there is no ambiguity on the face of the document, and no reference to
    2:00 PM
    CONT... Jose Antonio Hernandez Chapter 7
    information or terms in the recorded document or from the circumstances of
    the conveyance that would lead a bona fide purchaser to inquire as to the intent and meaning of the instrument, then the bona fide purchaser is entitled to rely on the written record and is not charged with or bound by unstated meanings or by secret or collateral agreements that add to or alter the written record.
    
    Id. at *10. While the above quotation is in the context of ownership interests in real property, rather than the nature of consideration, or lack thereof, in connection with a grant deed, the same underlying principle is applicable: "third parties, including the trustee and the estate’s creditors, must be able to rely on the terms of recorded deed." Id. at *11. See also id. at *10 ("As a general rule, when any ambiguity is not evident from the face of the instrument (i.e., a "latent" ambiguity), the deed must be construed solely from an analysis of the plain meaning of the document itself, and extrinsic evidence is not admissible."); Laux v. Freed, 53 Cal. 2d. 512, 523 (Cal. 1960) ("[I]f the language of a deed is plain, certain and unambiguous, neither parol evidence nor surrounding facts and circumstances will be considered to add to, detract from, or vary its terms.").
    
    Regarding the insolvency requirement, Plaintiff first argues that given the absence of reasonably equivalent value, Debtor’s insolvency as a result of the transfer should be assumed; Plaintiff cites United States v. Mazzeo, 245 B.R. 435, 441 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). The Court declines to make such a presumption. The case cited by Plaintiff, and the related case law, deals with fraudulent transfer provisions under New York state law. See, e.g., Kim v. Ji Sung Yoo, 2017 WL 4382078 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (noting presumption and collecting cases). No such burden shifting framework, however, exists under the Bankruptcy Code. See 5 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 548.11[2] (16th ed. 2017) ("Under state law and the UFTA (and presumably the UVTA), a well- recognized exception permits the court to infer a proscribed financial state once the plaintiff has shown a lack of fair consideration or a lack of reasonably equivalent value. This shift should not apply to cases brought under section 548.") (footnotes omitted); see also In re Galbreath, 286 B.R. 185, 197 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2002) ("The burden for proving constructive fraud falls on the trustee who must show by a preponderance of the evidence that all requirements set out in § 548(a)(1)(B) have been met.")
    
    Plaintiff next argues that Debtor’s insolvency can be established through a review of the schedules. Essentially, Plaintiff argues that the schedules indicate that Debtor was insolvent as of the petition date, and that the Court can work backwards to conclude that Debtor was insolvent on the date of the transfer. As one bankruptcy court has stated:
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    
    Since insolvency at a given point in time is often difficult to demonstrate by direct proof, courts permit the trustee to show that the debtor was insolvent at one point in time and then prove that the same condition existed at the time of the subject transfer. This method of proof has been labeled "retrojection," but
    
    Chapter 7
    it applies equally to situations in which the trustee starts at a point in time prior to the transfer. When the trustee chooses to use this method of proof it is essential that the trustee be able to show the absence of any substantial or radical changes in the assets or liabilities of the bankruptcy between the retrojection dates.
    
    In re R. Purbeck & Assocs., Ltd., 27 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1983) (footnotes and quotation omitted). Plaintiff argues that the schedules reflect that Debtor had no meaningful unexempt assets as of the petition date while much of Debtor’s unsecured debt was identified as having been incurred prior to the date of the transfer.
    Furthermore, Debtor’s statement of financial affairs does not disclose any significant transfers of property between the date of the subject transfer and the petition date.
    
    In Defendant’s opposition, she appears to contend that Debtor’s outstanding debt on the date of the subject transfer was $210,282 and that Debtor’s assets were valued at approximately $224,000. The Court notes that these assertions do not demonstrate solvency – they demonstrate insolvency as that term is defined in the Code. 11 U.S.C.
    § 101(32)(A)(ii) exempts from the solvency requirement property which may be exempt under § 522. The assets listed in Debtor’s schedules, and in Defendant’s opposition, all appear to be assets capable of being exempted under § 522, thereby rendering Defendant statutorily insolvent. Even ignoring that fact, however, Defendant’s opposition indicates that Debtor had $53,186 in equity in the property; transferring a 50% interest in the property would have rendered Debtor insolvent even before removing property which can be exempted. As a result, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has demonstrated there is no genuine dispute regarding Debtor’s insolvency on the date of the subject transfer.
  3. Recovery
    
    Plaintiff also seeks recovery of the subject property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550. 11
    U.S.C. § 550(a)(1) states:
    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, to the extent that a transfer is avoided under section 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 553(b), or 724(a) of this title,
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Antonio Hernandez
    the trustee may recover, for the benefit of the estate, the property transferred, or, if the court so orders, the value of such property, from –
    (1) the initial transferee of such transfer or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Defendant opposes the requested recovery, although the legal basis for the opposition is less than clear. Defendant argues that "annulment of the Transfer would have the effect of returning the Property to a single ownership since Debtor was the sole owner. Therefore, recovery of the Transfer is unnecessary and provides no benefit to the estate." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 18, lines 15-17]. The Court’s interpretation of the Plaintiff’s request is that Plaintiff is requesting an order indicating that the Property has retained to single ownership (the bankruptcy estate). Therefore, it does not appear there is really any legal dispute here, semantical differences aside.
  4. Withdrawal of Admissions
  In light of the foregoing, the Court is inclined to deny Defendant’s motion to withdraw admissions as moot. The Court need not rely on admissions by default in resolving the instant motion for summary judgment.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion for summary judgment, avoiding the transfer as constructively fraudulent and permitting Trustee’s recovery of such transfer. Defendant’s motion to withdrawn admissions is DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #26.00 CONT Motion to Withdraw Alleged Admissions To Trustees Requests For Admission
  
  From: 4/25/18 Also #25 & #27 EH
  Docket 49
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Frank X Ruggier
  
  Chapter 7
  2:00 PM
  6:16-13311
  
  Jose Antonio Hernandez
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro
  
  #27.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint to Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer
  
  From: 9/7/16, 11/9/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/27/17, 11/29/17, 1/10/18, 4/25/18
  
  Also #25 & #26 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By
  Jessica De Anda Leon
  Defendant(s):
  Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Plaintiff(s):
  Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier
  9:30 AM
  6:03-15174
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:12-01498 Morschauser v. Continental Capital LLC et al
  
  #1.00 Evidentiary hearing re Order to Show Cause Why Jesse Bojorquez, American Business Investments, William Morschauser, Stephen Collias and Continental Capital, LLC, Should Not Be Sanctioned for Facilitating Payment to and/or Receiving Payment for Broker Services in Contravention of this Court's August 11, 2003, Sale Order
  
  FROM: 3/12/18
  
  Also #2 EH
  Docket 1
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Devore Stop A General Partners Represented By
  Arshak Bartoumian - DISBARRED - Newton W Kellam
  Devore Stop Represented By
  Hutchison B Meltzer
  Defendant(s):
  Continental Capital LLC Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Stephen Collias Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Jesse Bojorquez Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  American Business Investments Represented By
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Lawrence J Kuhlman Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  
  Chapter 7
  Mohammed Abdizadeh Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  William G Morschauser Represented By Hutchison B Meltzer Reid A Winthrop
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  9:30 AM
  6:03-15174
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:12-01498 Morschauser v. Continental Capital LLC et al
  
  #2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Complaint by William G Morschauser against Continental Capital LLC , Stephen Collias , Jesse Bojorquez , American Business Investments , Mohammed Abdizadeh . (91 (Declaratory judgment)) , (72 (Injunctive relief - other))
  HOLDING DATE
  
  From: 3/11/15, 5/20/15, 7/29/15, 12/16/15, 2/3/16, 3/16/16, 5/11/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 11/16/16, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17, 3/12/18
  
  Also #1 EH
  Docket 1
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Devore Stop A General Partners Represented By
  Arshak Bartoumian - DISBARRED - Newton W Kellam
  Devore Stop Represented By
  Hutchison B Meltzer
  Defendant(s):
  Continental Capital LLC Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Stephen Collias Represented By Cara J Hagan
  Jesse Bojorquez Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Devore Stop A General Partners
  
  Chapter 7
  American Business Investments Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman
  Autumn D Spaeth ESQ
  Mohammed Abdizadeh Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  William G Morschauser Represented By Hutchison B Meltzer Reid A Winthrop
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  9:30 AM
  6:14-14377
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01206 Speier v. Simmons et al
  
  #3.00 Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01206. Complaint by Steven M Speier against Angela Simmons, David Schanhals, Hilary D Hill. (Charge To Estate) Robert)
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Defendant(s):
  Angela Simmons Represented By David Brian Lally
  David Schanhals Represented By David Brian Lally
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  David Brian Lally
  Plaintiff(s):
  Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Donald Reid
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  Elizabeth A LaRocque
  9:30 AM
  6:14-14377
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:15-01206 Speier v. Simmons et al
  
  #1.00 CONT Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01206. Complaint by Steven M Speier against Angela Simmons, David Schanhals, Hilary D Hill. (Charge To Estate) Robert)
  
  From: 5/22/18 EH
  Docket 1
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
  Defendant(s):
  Angela Simmons Represented By David Brian Lally
  David Schanhals Represented By David Brian Lally
  Hilary D Hill Represented By
  David Brian Lally
  Plaintiff(s):
  Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Donald Reid
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
  9:30 AM
  CONT...
  
  Hilary D Hill
  
  Elizabeth A LaRocque
  
  Chapter 7
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20318
  
  Lynette Kathryn Beaver
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lynette Kathryn Beaver Represented By Anerio V Altman
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11529
  
  Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Principal Residence with Bank of America NA Successor to Countrywide Home Loans
  
  From: 4/26/18 EH
  Docket 17
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 5/10/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  04/26/2018
  Summary of the Motion:
  Notice: Improper
  Opposition: None
  Address: 6713 Pierce Ct, Chino, CA 91710
  First trust deed: $476,934.41 with HSBC Bank USA (mortgage statement dated 01/01/2018)
  Second trust deed (to be avoided): $23,046.47 with Bank of America NA (statement dated 01/01/2018)
  Fair market value (per debtor declaration): $430,000
  
  TENTATIVE
  The electronically filed Motion contains a proof of service ("POS") with blank dates and no service information. The POS is insufficient to establish proper service as filed. Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to May 24, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for Movant to file and serve notice of the continued hearing pursuant to FRBP 7004.
  
  On correcting the service issue as indicated, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya
  
  Chapter 13
  Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Movant(s):
  Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11924
  
  Don Gurule and Elaine Gurule
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion for Setting Property Value Also #4
  EH
  
  Docket 16
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 5/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Don Gurule Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elaine Gurule Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Movant(s):
  Don Gurule Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Elaine Gurule Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11924
  
  Don Gurule and Elaine Gurule
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #3 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Don Gurule Represented By
  Christopher Hewitt
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elaine Gurule Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11973
  
  Kyle Stephens and Diandra Stephens
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Kyle Stephens Represented By Mona V Patel
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Diandra Stephens Represented By Mona V Patel
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11981
  
  Victorio Roman Manabat and Sheila Rosales Manabat
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Victorio Roman Manabat Represented By John A Varley
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sheila Rosales Manabat Represented By John A Varley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11986
  
  Ardreda Lynn Johnson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/18/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ardreda Lynn Johnson Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11993
  
  Anisha Christel Wilson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anisha Christel Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12001
  
  Marilyn N Koehnlein
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marilyn N Koehnlein Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12028
  
  Matthew Glenn Martin and Melody Dawn Martin
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Matthew Glenn Martin Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Melody Dawn Martin Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12033
  
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre Represented By LeRoy Roberson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12099
  
  James David Wilson, IV and Kerri Ann Wilson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  James David Wilson IV Represented By Dina Farhat
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kerri Ann Wilson Represented By Dina Farhat
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12170
  
  Pamela Ann Harris
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12174
  
  Oswaldo H Perez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/6/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Oswaldo H Perez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12177
  
  Rodolfo Aguiar and Irma D Aguiar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rodolfo Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Irma D Aguiar Represented By Alla Tenina
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12189
  
  Keely J Barrett
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Keely J Barrett Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12206
  
  Pedro Norlito Ibanez and Celia Singca Ibanez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Pedro Norlito Ibanez Represented By Alon Darvish
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Celia Singca Ibanez Represented By Alon Darvish
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12231
  
  Brian Howell and Faythe Howell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Brian Howell Represented By
  Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Faythe Howell Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12236
  
  Michael Anthony Rivera
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 Motion to Avoid JUNIOR LIEN with Corona Promenade Community Association Also #20 & #21
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Hearing Date: 05/24/2018
  Summary of the Motion:
  Notice: Proper
  Opposition: None
  Address: 636 Wellesley Drive, Corona CA 92879
  First trust deed: $793,014 with Wells Fargo Bank
  Second trust deed (to be avoided): $13,123.40 with Corona Promenade Comm. Ass’n
  Fair market value (per Debtor declaration): $475,000
  
  TENTATIVE
  Based on the Debtor’s evidence of the value of the Property, of the priority of the liens encumbering the Property, and proof that the Motion was properly served, which supports the Debtor’s request to avoid the junior lien on the Property, the Court is inclined to GRANT upon receipt of a chapter 13 discharge.
  
  APPEARANCE IS WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued to the next Chapter 13 calendar.
  
  PREVAILING PARTY SHOULD SUBMIT THE FORM ORDER WITHIN 7 DAYS, A BLANK COPY OF WHICH MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM THE FORMS SECTION ON THE COURT’S WEBSITE.
  
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Michael Anthony Rivera
  
  Chapter 13
  Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera
  Movant(s):
  Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12236
  
  Michael Anthony Rivera
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Motion to Avoid Property Lien with Internal Revenue Service Also #19 & #21
  EH
  
  Docket 31
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/5/18 AT 11:00 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera
  Movant(s):
  Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12236
  
  Michael Anthony Rivera
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #19 & #20 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12277
  
  Marta Samhouri
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Marta Samhouri Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12284
  
  Jose Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 Motion to vacate dismissal Also #24
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Velasco Represented By
  Daniel King
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King
  Movant(s):
  Jose Velasco Represented By
  Daniel King
  Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12284
  
  Jose Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #23 EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/18/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Velasco Represented By
  Daniel King
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12319
  
  Steven Michel McCann
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Steven Michel McCann Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12323
  
  Kevin E Horton and Manuel F. Dela Rosa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Kevin E Horton Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Manuel F. Dela Rosa Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12331
  
  Joe R Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Joe R Garcia Represented By
  Neil R Hedtke
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12355
  
  Marc Burns
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Marc Burns Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-12473
  
  Ignacio Salvador Aguilar and Cynthia Araujo Aguilar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 Motion for Setting Property Value with Declaration of Ignacio Salvador Aguilar EH
  Docket 15
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/24/2018
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On March 27, 2018, Ignacio and Cynthia Aguilar (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2014 Nissan Sentra (the "Sentra"). On April 30, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion to Value the Sentra ("Motion"). On May 8, 2018, Capital One Auto Finance ("Capital One") filed its opposition to the Motion ("Opposition"). No reply has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  One of the benefits of filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy is that under § 506(a) the debtor can bifurcate a secured, unavoidable debt, with one part representing the amount of the value of the collateral, and the deficiency being treated as an unsecured claim. See In re Penrod, 636 F.3d 1175, 1177 (9th Cir. 2011).
  
  The Debtors assert that the Sentra’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $5,800, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $5,308. The Debtors’ valuation is based on a KBB value trade-in report. The Debtors have also provided evidence of estimates obtained to repair damage and normal wear and tear on the Sentra. (Ex.’s 3 & 4). Capital One has responded that the value of the Sentra should be no less than $9,975. In support, Capital One has provided evidence that the NADA Guide provides $9,975 as the retail value for the Sentra. To the extent there is a dispute about the valuation, Capital One requests a continuance for an appraisal. The Court is inclined to grant a short continuance for Capital One to have an appraiser
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ignacio Salvador Aguilar and Cynthia Araujo Aguilar
  
  Chapter 13
  evaluate the Sentra’s condition.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ignacio Salvador Aguilar Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Cynthia Araujo Aguilar Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Movant(s):
  Ignacio Salvador Aguilar Represented By Jenny L Doling Jenny L Doling
  Cynthia Araujo Aguilar Represented By Jenny L Doling
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-13193
  
  Richard Garavito
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #30.00 Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 13 to 11 EH
  Docket 12
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian
  Movant(s):
  Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-24807
  
  Bryan K. Harrison and Dawn Harrison
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #31.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 113
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Bryan K. Harrison Represented By April E Roberts
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Dawn Harrison Represented By April E Roberts
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-12168
  
  Leslie A. Larson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #32.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Case EH
  Docket 71
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 5/14/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Leslie A. Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-12820
  
  Jose Ceja, Jr and Chasity Ann Ceja
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #33.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 175
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Ceja Jr Represented By
  Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Chasity Ann Ceja Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-20023
  
  Zachary Lee Nowak
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #34.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 75
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Zachary Lee Nowak Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-13233
  
  Sherry Ann Beardsley
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #35.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 5/10/18
  EH
  
  Docket 66
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sherry Ann Beardsley Represented By Jeffrey D Larkin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-16263
  
  Tanyua A Gates-Holmes
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #36.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 96
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tanyua A Gates-Holmes Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-18082
  
  Joseph John Vargas and Lydia Vargas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #37.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 4/26/18
  EH
  
  Docket 67
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Joseph John Vargas Represented By Dana Travis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lydia Vargas Represented By
  Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-18820
  
  Chase D Chung
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #38.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 54
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Chase D Chung Represented By Daniel C Sever
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-20133
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #39.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 60
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-21236
  
  Ronald A Waters and Trisha Waters
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 45
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ronald A Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Trisha Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-10787
  
  Willie J Brooks
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #41.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Willie J Brooks Represented By Kevin Tang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11075
  
  Ryan Christopher Murphy and Theresa Marie Murphy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #42.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 37
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ryan Christopher Murphy Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Theresa Marie Murphy Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11182
  
  Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #43.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 38
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Renard Louis Hamilton Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Regina Elizabeth Hamilton Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13165
  
  Richard Ortiz and Dolores Ortiz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #44.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Ortiz Represented By Elena Steers
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Dolores Ortiz Represented By Elena Steers
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-14588
  
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #45.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 35
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15102
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #46.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
  Docket 57
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15792
  
  William Martin Farber
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #47.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 39
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Martin Farber Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-16455
  
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #48.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 59
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  5/7/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Jucaban Tuason Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-17358
  
  David Kevin Davidson and Lisa Marie Davidson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #49.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 26
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 5/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  David Kevin Davidson Represented By Michael E Clark
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lisa Marie Davidson Represented By Michael E Clark
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-18531
  
  Victor Manuel Rosales
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #50.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 35
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Victor Manuel Rosales Represented By
  D Justin Harelik
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19589
  
  Rodrigo Fernando Ramirez Guinea
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #51.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rodrigo Fernando Ramirez Guinea Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-20019
  
  Frank Prouty
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #52.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 43
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Frank Prouty Represented By
  Nima S Vokshori
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:13-24456
  
  Lenore Esther Hernandez and Jesus Anthony Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17074 Cambria Ave., Fontana, CA 92336
  
  MOVANT: CITIBANK, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 43
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  The Opposition provides evidence that sufficient payments to cure the delinquency were made prior to the hearing. However, Debtors do not dispute that they were delinquent in making payments. Parties to discuss entry of a stay current APO.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jesus Anthony Hernandez Represented By Erik Clark Michael E Clark
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lenore Esther Hernandez Represented By Michael E Clark
  Movant(s):
  Citibank, N.A. Represented By Christina J O
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Lenore Esther Hernandez and Jesus Anthony Hernandez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:14-10322
  
  Marianne Bowers
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1065 Ehu Road, Makawao, HI 96768
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 41
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  Parties to provide status of cure and settlement discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marianne Bowers Represented By Thomas B Ure
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:15-20006
  
  Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 483 Grapevine Dr, Corona CA 92882
  
  MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
  
  From: 4/24/18 EH
  Docket 55
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/31/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
  Tentative Ruling:
  Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Carl J Charlot Represented By
  Michael A Younge
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot
  
  Chapter 13
  Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By April Harriott Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-14868
  
  Richard M. Orellano, II and Tifany Orellano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40748 Pocona Place, Murrieta, California 92562
  
  MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  From: 5/1/18 EH
  Docket 55
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/1/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Richard M. Orellano II Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Tifany Orellano Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Richard M. Orellano, II and Tifany Orellano
  
  Chapter 13
  Specialized Loan Servicing LLC Represented By
  Erin M McCartney
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-14588
  
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 4123 Pearl Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
  
  MOVANT: AMERIHOME MORTGAGE COMPANY LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 37
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 3 and 6. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
  Movant(s):
  AmeriHome Mortgage Company, Represented By
  Christina J O
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-15102
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 977 Allegre Drive, Corona CA 92879
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK
  
  From: 3/20/18, 4/24/18 EH
  Docket 54
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  3/20/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, National Represented By Sean C Ferry
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-16751
  
  Gary Ramirez and Christina Faith Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 27977 Owen Drive, Moreno Valley, CA 92555
  
  MOVANT: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to ¶3 of prayer for relief. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gary Ramirez Represented By
  Ethan Kiwhan Chin
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Christina Faith Ramirez Represented By
  Ethan Kiwhan Chin
  Movant(s):
  Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Mark S Krause
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Gary Ramirez and Christina Faith Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17134
  
  Noel Mallari
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 31932 COPPER TERRACE Menifee, CA 92584 UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 362
  
  MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION
  
  From: 4/24/18 EH
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to update Court regarding APO discussions. Absent agreement, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT termination of the co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT authority to offer loan workout options.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Noel Mallari Represented By
  David L Nelson
  Movant(s):
  Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By John D Schlotter
  Dane W Exnowski
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Noel Mallari
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19785
  
  Evonne Marie Woodard
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Sedan 4D LT
  
  MOVANT: CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE
  
  EH
  
  Docket 37
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 4/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Evonne Marie Woodard Represented By Dana Travis
  Movant(s):
  Capital One Auto Finance, a Represented By Bret D. Allen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10249
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #10.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 3187 Pinehurst Dr., Corona CA 92881
  
  MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 23
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Standing
  As a threshold matter, Debtor asserts that Movant has no standing. A party seeking relief from the stay "need only establish that it has a colorable claim to enforce a right against property of the estate." In re Pak, 2011 WL 7145763 (9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 2011). A showing by a party that it is a person entitled to enforce the note at issue or that it holds some ownership or other interest in the note translates to a colorable claim. Id. Here, the Movant has provided evidence of a Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale in which it was conferred title to the Property at issue. For purposes of relief from stay, Movant has established it has a colorable claim sufficient to confer standing.
  
  Relief from Stay
  The Court takes judicial notice of its Order Granting Motion to Dismiss the Debtor’s Adversary Proceeding (Docket No. 29) in related Case No. 6:18-ap-01038- MH ("AP Order"). In that AP Order, the Court determined that pursuant to In re Perl, the foreclosure and issuance of a writ of possession against the Debtor by the California Superior Court extinguished all legal and equitable possessory interests in the real property at issue, including any that may have been held by the Debtor. Eden Place, LLC v. Sholem Perl (In re Perl), 811 F.3d 1120, 1128 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Perl v. Eden Place, LLC, 137 S. Ct. 39, 196 L. Ed. 2d 27 (2016).
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Derick Jones
  
  Chapter 7
  
  The Court finds that the Opposition is not well-taken and is inclined to adopt its AP Order as a basis for granting of the Motion, in addition to the grounds set forth in the Motion itself. The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay, GRANT the request for an order confirming that there is no stay in effect, and GRANT waiver of the 14-day stay.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Derick Jones Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  U.S. Bank National Association, on Represented By
  Jamie D Hanawalt
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12657
  
  Tamoor Malik Ilyas
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Motor Vehicle Negligence
  
  MOVANT: EYDEE VELASCO MARTINEZ
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service was proper.
  No opposition has been filed.
  
  The Motion is GRANTED pursuant to § 362(d)(1) for Movant to pursue insurance only. Request for relief under ¶ 2 is also GRANTED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tamoor Malik Ilyas Represented By
  Raj T Wadhwani
  Movant(s):
  Eydee Velasco Martinez Represented By Demetrios Papanikolas
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12684
  
  Carmen Burgueno
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Camry
  
  MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATON
  
  EH
  
  Docket 18
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Carmen Burgueno Represented By Curtis A Cavalletto
  Movant(s):
  Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
  Austin P Nagel
  Trustee(s):
  Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12774
  
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property 17253 Emerson St, Victorville, CA 92394.
  
  MOVANT: TATIANA NOEMI ALEGRE aka RICK ALEGRE
  
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2018
  The Motion was not served on any creditors. As such the Motion must at the outset be denied for a failure to provide creditors with due process.
  
  The Opposition argues that the Debtor has failed to demonstrate changed circumstances and that the Motion is untimely. As to the first argument, the Court concurs. The only "change in circumstances" indicated by the Debtor is that she has now hired counsel. However, there is no explanation of why counsel for the second and third case did not verify the petition was complete when the documents were filed.
  
  As to the second grounds indicated by the Opposition, the Court does not read § 362(c) as requiring a motion to impose the stay to be heard within 30 days of the petition day, it must only be filed prior to the expiration of the 30-day period. Here, the Motion was timely.
  
  The Reply does not cure the service issues and responds only by offering objecting creditor an APO.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Movant(s):
  
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre
  
  LeRoy Roberson
  
  Chapter 13
  Tatiana Noemi Alegre Represented By LeRoy Roberson LeRoy Roberson
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12901
  
  Veronica Santos Ortiz and Conrado Corona Gonzalez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2011 HONDA ODYSSEY, 5FNR L5H6 8BB0 44028
  
  MOVANT: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION
  
  EH
  
  Docket 7
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2015
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Veronica Santos Ortiz Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Conrado Corona Gonzalez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE Represented By
  Vincent V Frounjian
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13092
  
  Mark Irwin Barule
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 49143 Eisenhower Drive, Indio, CA 92201
  
  MOVANT: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR
  
  EH
  
  Docket 16
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 6/5/18 AT 10:00 AM
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Mark Irwin Barule Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
  Movant(s):
  Riverside County Treasurer-Tax Represented By Ronak N Patel
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13219
  
  Patrick Merrill and Gayle Merrill
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #16.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 232 Ohio St, Lake Elsinore CA 92530
  
  MOVANT: 2ND CHANCE MORTGAGE INC
  
  From: 5/15/18 EH
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  Tentative Ruling:
  05/29/2017
  Service is now proper.
  No opposition has been filed.
  
  GRANT as to § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT request to waive 14-day stay. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  5/15/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  Pursuant to Local Rule 4001-1(c)(1)(C)(iv), service is required upon "the holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property that is known to the movant, scheduled by the debtor, or appears in the public record." Here, Movant is the junior lienholder on the subject property, yet has not served the senior lienholder with the instant motion. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the motion for service on the first mortgagee, Selection Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Patrick Merrill and Gayle Merrill
  
  Chapter 7
  Patrick Merrill Represented By Jeremiah D Raxter
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Gayle Merrill Represented By
  Jeremiah D Raxter
  Movant(s):
  2nd Chance Mortgages Inc. Represented By Henry D Paloci
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-12748
  
  William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 1/31/18, 4/11/18, 5/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 74
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 5/4/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
  Movant(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith
  11:00 AM
  6:17-13232
  
  David B. Hertsgaard
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/30/18
  
  No opposition has been filed. Service was Okay
  
  The applications for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
  
  Trustee Fees: $ 5,770.31 Trustee Expenses: $ 63.40
  
  Tax Preparer Fee: $ 1,000.00
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  David B. Hertsgaard Represented By Timothy S Huyck
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10696
  
  Audrey Beck
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #3.00 Motion to Reopen Case and Issuing OSC why Martin Rojas should not be sanctioned for improperly providing legal advice
  
  Returned Mail: Not Deliverable as Addressed Re: Martin Rojas 3200 Guasti Rd Ste 100, Ontario CA 91760
  
  EH
  
  Docket 16
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Audrey Beck Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Audrey Beck Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:14-12990
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01121 Smedman et al v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al
  
  #4.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01121. Complaint by Craig Smedman against STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION. (Fee Not Required $350.00). Joint Plaintiff Veronica Lee Wilkins Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other)) (Evans, Neil)
  
  From: 8/30/17, 9/27/17, 1/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CLOSED 5/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Garrick Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
  Defendant(s):
  STATE BOARD OF Pro Se
  California Department of Tax and Represented By
  Matthew C. Heyn
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Veronica Lee Wilkins Represented By Neil C Evans
  Plaintiff(s):
  Craig Smedman Represented By Neil C Evans
  Veronica Lee Wilkins Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Garrick Craig Smedman
  
  Chapter 7
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-15419
  
  Francisco Javier Castillo
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01310 Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital v. Castillo
  
  #5.00 Order to Appear and Show Cause Why Case Should Not Be Dismissed Also #6
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco Javier Castillo Represented By Joseph M Tosti
  Defendant(s):
  Francisco Javier Castillo Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Represented By
  Lazaro E Fernandez
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-15419
  
  Francisco Javier Castillo
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:16-01310 Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital v. Castillo
  
  #6.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01310. Complaint by Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Swift Capital against Francisco Javier Castillo (willful and malicious injury)
  
  From: 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 11/8/17, 1/31/18, 3/28/18 Also #5
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco Javier Castillo Represented By Joseph M Tosti
  Defendant(s):
  Francisco Javier Castillo Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  Swift Financial Corporation d.b.a. Represented By
  Lazaro E Fernandez
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:16-20260
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al
  
  #7.00 Motion for Default Judgment Also #8
  EH
  
  Docket 46
  Tentative Ruling:
  5/30/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On November 18, 2016, Javier & Carmen Lopez (collectively "Debtors"; individually, "Javier" and "Carmen") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On March 6, 2017, Amarillo College of Hairdressing ("Plaintiff") filed a non-dischargeability complaint against Javier pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4), and (a)(6). On July 12, 2017, the clerk entered default against Javier.
  
  On October 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On November 7, 2017, Debtors filed their opposition. On November 13, 2017, the Court granted the motion, and, on December 11, 2017, Plaintiff amended its complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On February 26, 2018, the clerk entered default against Carmen.
  
  On April 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. According to Plaintiff, Javier, while employed as the Dean of Education at Plaintiff’s Palm Desert campus, received, through direct deposit, twice his agreed upon salary for a period of one year.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  Plaintiff asserts that the direct deposit authorization form contained a provision which granted Plaintiff the right to correct any erroneous overpayments of funds. After alerting Javier of the erroneous double payment, Javier refused to voluntarily reimburse Plaintiff for the overpayment. Plaintiff also asserts that Javier was aware of the erroneous double payment during the time when the double payments were made.
  
  On January 2, 2014, Plaintiff filed a state court complaint against Javier for breach of contract, fraud, and conversion. On September 15, 2015, the state court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to all causes of action, and entered judgment in the amount of $49,603.08.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Entry of Default
    FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
  2. Motion for Default Judgment
    1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
      
      FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Javier Lopez
      1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
        
        Chapter 13
        
        Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
        
        Here, Plaintiff served Debtors at the address listed on their bankruptcy schedules and served Debtor’s attorney via ECF. Therefore, service is proper.
    2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
  Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").
  
  Here, the complaint includes three causes of action, all related to non-dischargeability: (1) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A); (2) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4); and (3) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)
  1. The above provisions read, in pertinent part:
    1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –

Spending 6 hours in one day on ambiguous "revisions" to a motion, and charging $2,400, appears excessive

2:00 PM

CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

d. Business Operations 3/15/18, 3/16/18, 3/18/18 and 3/20/18 (Ex. 1 at 28) – "Begin review and revisions to January MOR" (3 hours, $1,200) and "Revisions to December and January MORs" (5.3 hours,

$2,120.00) and "Finish revising December and January MORs" (1.6 hours, $640.00) and "Further review and revision to MORs" (0.7 hours,

$280.00) (total: 10.6 hours, $4,240.00)

These four tasks seem to say the same thing: the MORs were reviewed and revised. Considering this, 10.6 hours for such a task and over

$4,200 billed appears excessive.

Financing/Cash Collections 2/10/18 2/15/18 2/19/19 (Ex. 1 at 28-29) – "Draft motion to incur financing for insurance premiums, including review of proposals, and last year’s contract" (2.8 hours,
$1,120.00) and "Further work on financial motion Phone calls with court, Nations, client & insurance agent" (4.3 hours, $1,720.00) and "Significant revisions to motion to incur debt including changing to add motion for authority to make case collateral expenditure for the down payment. Includes conference call with Mike and Richard re current terms. Email to Mike and Rich re details and declarations; revisions to budget with client approval; emails with Nations NY attorneys. Also include significant revisions to application for order shortening time" (6.6 hours, $2,640.00) (total: 13.7 hours, $5,440.00)

These entries suffer from significant lumping, as phone calls with the relevant parties and the Court are billed with drafting and revising the motion. 14 hours on the motion and almost $5,500 appears excessive.
Financing/Cash Collections 2/26/18 and 2/27/18 (Ex. 1 at 29) – "Revisions to stipulation for DIP financing including conference call with Todd and Pat Collins, conference call with Todd And client; review of terms with Todd, development of counter-proposal, and detailed email to Pat Collins" (4.9 hours, $1960.00) and "Further revisions to stipulation, motion and proposed order for DIP financing.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

Email to all parties for review" (2.9 hours, $1,160.00) (total: 7.8 hours,

$3,120.00)

Lumping and 5 hours at almost $2,000 to revise a stipulation and make conference calls and send emails appears excessive. There were even more revisions and emails sent out after the first entry, which total up to $3,100 and almost 8 hours.

Lumping
1. Cash Collateral Motion 12/11/17 (Ex. 1 at 34) – "Revisions to cash collateral docs, draft supplement to motion; multiple phone calls and email with client; multiple emails with nations’ counsel; review POS list and addresses for accuracy" (5.3 hours, $2,120.00)
  
  While this item is a good example of lumping, there were many lumping examples scattered throughout the records. Here, it is hard to tell how much time was dedicated to each task, and grouping higher paying uses of time with lower ones creates ambiguity.
2. Financing Cash Collections 3/6/18 (Ex. 1 at 30) – "Prepare for and appear at hearings on DIP Financing and CRO including pre-hearing meetings with Nations’ counsel and Stephen Douglass (5.4 hours,

$2,160.00)

Lumping.

The total of all listed items is $31,270.00. The above entries do not constitute an exhaustive list of the problematic entries.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

2:00 PM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #42.00 Motion to Approve the Second Amendment to Stipulation Regarding DIP Financing and Modification of Cash Collateral Stipulation Between Auto Strap Transport, LLC and Nations Fund I, LLC

Docket 303

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

11:00 AM

6:17-11670

AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO

Chapter 7 #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 107

Tentative Ruling:

06/27/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Applications of the associated professionals, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees:	$ 14,667.33
Trustee Expenses:	$ 422.75
Attorney Fees:	$16,925.39 (per Stipulation with the UST)
Attorney Costs:	$861.45
Accountant Fees:	$1,668
Accountant Costs:	$251.50

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

AMANDO MORALES Represented By William D Gurney

11:00 AM

CONT...

AMANDO MORALES and ALICIA MALDONADO

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

ALICIA MALDONADO JIMENEZ Represented By

William D Gurney

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui

11:00 AM

6:18-14300

Hector Comparan Sarabia

Chapter 7 #2.00 Motion to Extend Deadline to File Schedules or Provide Required Information, and/or Plan (Case Opening Documents) (Schedules)

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

6/27/18

BACKGROUND
On May 22, 2018, Hector Comparan Sarabia ("Debtor" or "Defendant") filed for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

The Trustee alleges that on or around May 24, 2018, he was notified by Wells Fargo that there was an account under Debtor’s name with approximately $64,313.33 on that date.

The 341(a) meeting was scheduled for June 26, 2018, but Trustee, not Debtor, filed this motion to extend time to file case opening documents ("Motion") on June 6, 2018.The Trustee is requesting an extension to July 10, 2018, in order to determine whether there are non-exempt assets to pay creditors. Trustee asserts that an extension would be in the creditors’ best interests.
As of June 21, 2018, there has been no objection to this Motion by the Debtor.
DISCUSSION

The court has broad discretion in supervising litigation. Irving v. Cty. of Sacramento, 231 F. App'x 584, 585 (9th Cir. 2007). The bankruptcy judge has the authority to grant an extension, and may do so when it is within their equitable discretion. See In re Davies, 96 F.Supp. 416, 419-420 (W.D. Va. 1949).

Pursuant to LBR 1007-1(b)(1), the requirements for a motion for an extension of time to file schedules, statements, and other documents is that it must (A) identify the date petition was filed and date of proposed new deadline, (B) be supported by a

11:00 AM

CONT...

Hector Comparan Sarabia

Chapter 7

declaration establishing a sufficient explanation for the requested extension of time, and (C) contain a proof of service upon the case trustee (if any) and all creditors. The motion may be ruled upon without a hearing pursuant to LBR 9013-1(p).

FRBP 1007(c) holds that any extension of time to file schedules, statements, and other documents required under this rule may be granted only on motion for cause shown and on notice to the relevant parties. If a list, schedule, or statement is not prepared and filed as required.

FRCP 6(b)(1) contains a similar cause requirement, as it holds "a court may, for good cause, extend the time" for an act that must be done within a specific time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). It would arguably be a higher standard than FRBP 1007, as the civil procedure rule requires "good cause", while the bankruptcy rule only requires "cause". FRCP 6(b)(1) good cause requires the party seeking an enlargement of time simply to "demonstrate some justification for the issuance of the order" and will "normally be granted in the absence of bad faith or prejudice to the adverse party." Bryant v. Smith, 165 B.R. 176, 182 (W.D. Va. 1994).

FRBP 1007(k) allows the court to order the trustee, a petitioning creditor, committee, or other party to prepare and file any of these papers within a time fixed by the court. Here, while Trustee has not established cause for Debtor to have additional time to file the required information, the Court is inclined to allow Trustee until July 10, 2018, to file schedules pursuant to FRBP 1007(k).

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the Motion and allow Trustee until July 10, 2018, to file any of the deficient information.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Hector Comparan Sarabia Pro Se

Movant(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Hector Comparan Sarabia

Chapter 7

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta

11:00 AM

6:18-14532

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7 #3.00 CONT Motion for Order Excusing Co-Debtor Becky L. Colvin from Pre-Filing Counseling Based Upon Co-Debtor's Mental Incapacity and Physical Disability [11 USC §109(h)(4)]

From: 6/13/18 Also #4

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

6/13/18

BACKGROUND

On May 29, 2018, William & Becky Colvin (collectively "Debtors"; individually, "William" and "Becky") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. That same day, Debtors filed two motions: (1) a "motion for exemption from credit counseling due to mental incapacity and physical disability"; and (2) a "motion that William J. Colvin be appointed as "next friend" nunc pro tunc for co-debtor Becky L. Colvin." Both motions were set for hearing on June 13, 2018. The Court notes that, pursuant to the Local Rules, the form notice used by Debtors, and the contents of the motions, any party wishing to oppose the motions must file opposition at least fourteen days prior to the hearing. Debtors scheduled the instant hearings on shortened notice without Court permission, however, and, as a result, the opposition deadline was a day after the service deadline.

The factual background is the same for both requests. Debtors assert that Becky was kicked in the head by a horse and has spent the last twelve years in an at-home

11:00 AM

CONT...

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7

hospital bed with the exception of health care appointments. Debtors assert that Becky is unable to talk or effectively communicate.

DISCUSSION

Waiver of Credit Counseling Requirement

11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(4), which identifies an exception to the prepetition credit counseling requirement, states:

The requirements of paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a debtor whom the court determines, after notice and hearing, is unable to complete those requirements because of incapacity, disability, or active military duty in a military combat zone. For the purposes of this paragraph, incapacity means that the debtor is impaired by reason of mental illness or mental deficiency so that he is incapable of realizing and making rational decisions with respect to his financial responsibilities; and "disability" means that the debtor is so physically impaired as to be unable, after reasonable effort, to participate in person, telephone, or Internet briefing required under paragraph (1).

The Court finds that William’s declaration sets forth sufficient evidence to establish Becky’s disability for purposes of § 109(h)(4). Due to the improper notice of the motion for a waiver of the credit counseling requirement, however, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE this motion for two weeks, at which time the Court intends to GRANT the motion if no opposition has been filed.
Next Friend
11:00 AM
CONT...

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7
FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1004.1 allows "a representative, including a general guardian, committee, conservator, or similar fiduciary," to file a voluntary petition on behalf of an incompetent person.
The rule further provides that:
[a]n infant or incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may file a voluntary petition by next friend or guardian ad litem. The court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for an infant or incompetent person who is a debtor and is not otherwise represented or shall make any other order to protect the infant or incompetent debtor.

Rule 1004.1 is patterned after FED.R.CIV.P. Rule 17(c), which applies to adversary proceedings pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7017. That rule provides that an incompetent person may sue "by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem" if the incompetent person does not have a duly appointed representative, and provides that "[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action."

Cases interpreting Rule 17(c) look to the law of the state in which the subject is domiciled and follow the state's incompetency laws." In re Burchell, 2014 WL 1304635, at *1 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2014)(internal citations omitted). This court shall thus look to the California Probate Code’s § 811 which outlines the possible bases for a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks capacity to make a decision or do a certain act, including for example, incapacity to contract or to execute wills or trusts.

In support of the Motion, the Debtors have attached the Declaration of William in which he details the extensive limitation that Becky experiences due to the injury suffered by a horse. Notwithstanding these diagnosis, § 811(d) provides that "the mere diagnosis of a mental or physical disorder shall not be sufficient in and of itself to support a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks the capacity to do a certain act." Instead, California law requires evidence of specific deficits and a link between the identified deficits and the acts that the allegedly incompetent person would otherwise have capacity to perform. The types of deficiencies are outlined in § 811 as follows:
1. Alertness and attention, including, but not limited to, the following:
  1. Level of arousal or consciousness.
  2. Orientation to time, place, person, and situation.
  3. Ability to attend and concentrate.
2. Information processing, including, but not limited to, the following:
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin
  1. Short- and long-term memory, including immediate recall.
  2. Ability to understand or communicate with others, either verbally or otherwise.
  3. Recognition of familiar objects and familiar persons.
  4. Ability to understand and appreciate quantities.
  5. Ability to reason using abstract concepts.
    
    Chapter 7
  6. Ability to plan, organize, and carry out actions in one's own rational self-interest.
  7. Ability to reason logically.
3. Thought processes. Deficits in these functions may be demonstrated by the presence of the following:
  1. Severely disorganized thinking.
  2. Hallucinations.
  3. Delusions.
  4. Uncontrollable, repetitive, or intrusive thoughts.
4. Ability to modulate mood and affect. Deficits in this ability may be demonstrated by the presence of a pervasive and persistent or recurrent state of euphoria, anger, anxiety, fear, panic, depression, hopelessness or despair, helplessness, apathy or indifference, that is inappropriate in degree to the individual's circumstances.

While William’s declaration presents evidence of Becky’s inability to community, the Court will require supplemental evidence as to Becky’s state of mind and ability to communicate (for example, a written medical diagnosis).

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William J Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

Joint Debtor(s):

Becky L Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7

William J Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson Ronald L Brownson Ronald L Brownson

Becky L Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14532

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7 #4.00 CONT Motion That William J. Colvin be Appointed As "Next Friend" Nunc Pro Tunc for Co-Debtor Becky L. Colvin Pursuant to BR 1004.1 [11 USC §109(h)(4)]

From: 6/13/18 Also #3

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

6/13/18

BACKGROUND

The factual background is the same for both requests. Debtors assert that Becky was kicked in the head by a horse and has spent the last twelve years in an at-home hospital bed with the exception of health care appointments. Debtors assert that Becky

11:00 AM

CONT...

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7

is unable to talk or effectively communicate.

DISCUSSION

Waiver of Credit Counseling Requirement

11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(4), which identifies an exception to the prepetition credit counseling requirement, states:

The requirements of paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a debtor whom the court determines, after notice and hearing, is unable to complete those requirements because of incapacity, disability, or active military duty in a military combat zone. For the purposes of this paragraph, incapacity means that the debtor is impaired by reason of mental illness or mental deficiency so that he is incapable of realizing and making rational decisions with respect to his financial responsibilities; and "disability" means that the debtor is so physically impaired as to be unable, after reasonable effort, to participate in person, telephone, or Internet briefing required under paragraph (1).

The Court finds that William’s declaration sets forth sufficient evidence to establish Becky’s disability for purposes of § 109(h)(4). Due to the improper notice of the motion for a waiver of the credit counseling requirement, however, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE this motion for two weeks, at which time the Court intends to GRANT the motion if no opposition has been filed.
Next Friend

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1004.1 allows "a representative, including a general guardian,
11:00 AM
CONT...

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7
committee, conservator, or similar fiduciary," to file a voluntary petition on behalf of an incompetent person.
The rule further provides that:
[a]n infant or incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may file a voluntary petition by next friend or guardian ad litem. The court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for an infant or incompetent person who is a debtor and is not otherwise represented or shall make any other order to protect the infant or incompetent debtor.

Rule 1004.1 is patterned after FED.R.CIV.P. Rule 17(c), which applies to adversary proceedings pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7017. That rule provides that an incompetent person may sue "by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem" if the incompetent person does not have a duly appointed representative, and provides that "[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action."

Cases interpreting Rule 17(c) look to the law of the state in which the subject is domiciled and follow the state's incompetency laws." In re Burchell, 2014 WL 1304635, at *1 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2014)(internal citations omitted). This court shall thus look to the California Probate Code’s § 811 which outlines the possible bases for a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks capacity to make a decision or do a certain act, including for example, incapacity to contract or to execute wills or trusts.

In support of the Motion, the Debtors have attached the Declaration of William in which he details the extensive limitation that Becky experiences due to the injury suffered by a horse. Notwithstanding these diagnosis, § 811(d) provides that "the mere diagnosis of a mental or physical disorder shall not be sufficient in and of itself to support a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks the capacity to do a certain act." Instead, California law requires evidence of specific deficits and a link between the identified deficits and the acts that the allegedly incompetent person would otherwise have capacity to perform. The types of deficiencies are outlined in § 811 as follows:
1. Alertness and attention, including, but not limited to, the following:
  1. Level of arousal or consciousness.
  2. Orientation to time, place, person, and situation.
  3. Ability to attend and concentrate.
2. Information processing, including, but not limited to, the following:
  1. Short- and long-term memory, including immediate recall.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin
  2. Ability to understand or communicate with others, either verbally or otherwise.
  3. Recognition of familiar objects and familiar persons.
  4. Ability to understand and appreciate quantities.
  5. Ability to reason using abstract concepts.
    
    Chapter 7
  6. Ability to plan, organize, and carry out actions in one's own rational self-interest.
  7. Ability to reason logically.
3. Thought processes. Deficits in these functions may be demonstrated by the presence of the following:
  1. Severely disorganized thinking.
  2. Hallucinations.
  3. Delusions.
  4. Uncontrollable, repetitive, or intrusive thoughts.
4. Ability to modulate mood and affect. Deficits in this ability may be demonstrated by the presence of a pervasive and persistent or recurrent state of euphoria, anger, anxiety, fear, panic, depression, hopelessness or despair, helplessness, apathy or indifference, that is inappropriate in degree to the individual's circumstances.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William J Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

Joint Debtor(s):

Becky L Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

William J Colvin and Becky L Colvin

Chapter 7

William J Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson Ronald L Brownson Ronald L Brownson

Becky L Colvin Represented By Ronald L Brownson

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13758

Timothy Rice

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion to vacate dismissal order and reinstate chapter 7 case pursuant to

F.R.C.P. 9023 and 11 U.S.C. §105 EH

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:

6/27/18

BACKGROUND

On May 3, 2018, Timothy Rice ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition.

The Debtor took his online credit counseling course in October 2017, but the certificate of credit counseling ("Certificate") expired. Debtor retook the course on May 3, 2018. Debtor’s attorney inadvertently used the expired Certificate for Debtor’s bankruptcy case. A deficiency notice was issued, yet the renewed certificate was still not uploaded. The case was dismissed on May 23, 2018.

On May 24, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to vacate dismissal ("Motion") and to reinstate the case.
LEGAL DISCUSSION

Under FRCP 60, a court may relieve a party from a final judgment or order for "mistake" or "any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment".
11:00 AM
CONT...

Timothy Rice

Chapter 7
Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1)-(6). "Unless justice requires otherwise … no error or defect in any ruling or order … is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict, or for vacating … unless refusal to take action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice" Fed. R. Civ. P. 61. The court must "disregard any error or defect in the proceeding, which does not affect the substantial right of the parties". Fed. R. Civ. P. 61.

The Bankruptcy Code also holds "no provision … shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary or appropriate to enforce or implement court orders or rules". 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).

Here, there was an admitted mistake by the Debtor’s attorney in inadvertently filing the expired Certificate. The Debtor’s attorney asks the court to not penalize the Debtor with another bankruptcy filing on his public record. Granting this motion is consistent with substantial justice, as Debtor’s attorney rightly asserts that the Debtor should not be penalized by another filing on his record due to the attorney’s mistake. The substantial rights of the parties are not affected by granting this motion, and equitable justice is advanced by granting this motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the Motion to vacate the dismissal and reinstate the case.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Timothy Rice Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
Timothy Rice Represented By Paul Y Lee
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Timothy Rice

Chapter 7
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:13-27610

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

#6.00 Motion to Leave Certain Asset of the Estate Unadministered EH
Docket 466

Tentative Ruling:
6/27/18
1. BACKGROUND
  On October 24, 2013, Baleine LP ("Debtor" or "Defendant") filed for chapter 7 relief. On October 25, 2013, Douglas Roger, a general partner of the Debtor, filed his own bankruptcy case (6:13-27611 - "Roger Case"). Larry Simons ("Trustee") was appointed the chapter 7 trustee on both cases. On November 27, 2013, Helen Frazer was appointed as the successor chapter 7 Trustee for the Roger Case.
  
  The Debtor owned property in New York, which was sold by the Trustee. On February 21, 2014, the Baleine Trustee filed a Proof of Claim in the Roger Case ("Claim"). As of May 4, 2018, the Baleine Trustee will have liquidated or abandoned all known assets except for the Claim. The Trustee’s funds total $404,999.04. There is uncertainty as to when the Roger Case will close.
  
  On May 4, 2018, the Debtor filed this motion ("Motion") to close the current case and leave the Claim unadministered. The Debtor leaves open the possibility that the Court may administer the Claim later if Trustee receives a distribution from the Roger Estate. The Debtor also asks that the Claim be deemed not abandoned upon closure of this case. No opposition to the Motion has been filed.
2. DISCUSSION

"After an estate is fully administered and the court has discharged the trustee, the court shall close the case." 11 U.S.C. § 350(a). Any property under § 521(1) not otherwise administered at the time of the closing of a case is abandoned to the Debtor and deemed administered unless the court orders otherwise. 11 U.S.C. § 554(c) (emphasis added). A court may expressly order that a scheduled asset will not be abandoned to the debtor when a case is closed. See In re Prospero, 107 B.R. 732, 735 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1989).

11:00 AM

CONT... Baleine LP

Here, granting the Motion in the creditors’ best interests. Any distribution on

Chapter 7

the Claim is dependent on the administration of the Roger Case. Since it is uncertain when the Roger Case will close, this case should be closed so creditors may receive funds currently held in the estate, rather than keeping the case open for an indefinite period. Granting this motion would allow for the prompt closure of this case, the distribution of funds currently on hand, and would preserve the Claim if funds are to be received for distribution in the future. The Court is further inclined to deem the Claim as not abandoned, as it would preserve the Claim for future administration.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Baleine LP Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

11:00 AM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7 #7.00 CONT Objection to Claim #17 by Revere Financial Corporation

(Holding date)

From: 10/1/14, 11/5/14, 12/3/14, 12/15/14, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 10/21/15, 11/18/15, 12/16/15, 1/13/16, 3/2/16, 5/4/16, 6/1/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16,

2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 9/20/17, 3/21/18

Docket 333

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 11:00 AM

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:16-17888

Jay J. Goodman

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion for Attorney Fees in Connection with Order to Show or, in the Alternative, for an Order to Show Cause why Jay Goodman Should not be Sanctioned

Also #9 EH

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:

6/27/18

BACKGROUND
On August 31, 2016, Jay Goodman ("Debtor" or "Defendant") filed for chapter 7 relief. Arturo Cisneros is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

The Debtor and creditor Delia Moya ("Moya") were involved in a previous family law matter (Case Number IND1302108 – "Family Law Case"). The Debtor and Moya entered into a marriage settlement agreement ("MSA") on May 10, 2016.

Moya alleges the Debtor began threatening her with a Contempt Motion as early as August 11, 2017. The Debtor filed the Contempt Motion on February 12, 2018, and the Court issued the Order to Show Cause ("OSC") on February 27, 2018.

Subsequently, Moya hired counsel who believed that the Contempt Motion and OSC were frivolous and requested that the Debtor withdraw the motion before seeking sanctions. The Debtor did not withdraw the OSC and continued to litigate the issue.

On May 31, 2018, Moya filed this motion for attorney fees ("Motion") to require the Debtor to pay her attorney’s fees and costs associated with opposing the Contempt Motion and OSC. Moya asks for $8,350.00 in attorney’s fees: $6,850 to respond to the Contempt Motion and OSC, and $1,500 for bringing this Motion to enforce the MSA. In the alternative, Moya asks for an Order to Show Cause as to why Debtor should not be sanctioned. Concurrently, with this Motion, the Court is considering whether the Debtor’s counsel should be sanctioned for his role in the filing of the Contempt Motion.
11:00 AM
CONT... Jay J. Goodman Chapter 7
The Debtor filed an objection ("Objection") to this Motion on June 7, 2018.
The Creditor filed a reply ("Reply") to the Objection on June 20, 2018.
DISCUSSION

Section 523(a)(5) and § 523(a)(15) ("Section 523") except from discharge debts for domestic support obligations or in connection with a separation agreement, respectively.

Moya asserts she is entitled to attorney’s fees under the MSA. (Motion at Ex. 5, MSA, ¶ 14.2). The Amended EAO of the MSA requires that Moya be paid no less than $485.00 per month for spousal support arrears and agreed arrears. The MSA requires that "nothing herein shall preclude a court awarding need-based or conduct- based fees in any action or proceeding to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement".

This Motion argues that the Debtor’s Contempt Motion and OSC were frivolously filed to preclude the enforcement of the MSA and Debtor’s payment responsibilities. Section 523(a)(5) and § 523(a)(15) excepts from discharge domestic support obligation or debts in connection with a separation agreement. Moya asserts she could not afford an attorney to defend herself from the Contempt Motion and OSC, yet was required to litigate to enforce the MSA. After Moya’s failed pro se attempt, she received an $8,350 loan for attorney fees from her friend, Dana Mcquown.

The Debtor’s Objection asserts that Moya’s motion is unintelligible and inconsistent with prior agreements. The Debtor is unsure whether Moya is filing a motion for attorney’s fees or a motion for an order to show cause, or both. These actions have different time limits for replies, and thus the distinction is significant. The Debtor argues that a March 28 OSC Contempt Hearing resulted in an agreement for a hearing on sanctions to proceed, and that Moya’s filing for sanctions is frivolous under these circumstances.

Moya’s Reply responds that filing this Motion was not frivolous, as this Motion asks for attorney’s fees, while the prior agreement sought sanctions. Moya further clarifies that this is a motion for attorney’s fees, with a request for an OSC as an alternative. Separately, the Court notes that the OSC issued after the March 28 hearing specifically regarded sanctions against the Debtor’s Counsel where the instant Motion seeks sanctions as against the Debtor.

As to the Debtor’s request for fees pursuant to the MSA, Moya has not

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jay J. Goodman

Chapter 7

provided sufficient legal authority to support the proposition that this Court has jurisdiction to award fees under the MSA or sufficient authority that the filing of an opposition to the Contempt Motion (i.e. a defensive act), would constitute an "act to enforce" the provisions of the MSA as contemplated by ¶ 14.2 of the MSA. In sum, Moya has failed to demonstrate that this Court has the legal authority to enforce the MSA.

As an alternative to granting fees pursuant to the MSA, Moya argues that §105 of the Bankruptcy Code ("Section 105") justifies sanctions against the Debtor and requests that this Court issue a new order to show cause for contempt against the Debtor, personally, for the fees incurred by Moya in defending against the Contempt Motion and OSC. The Court has already found that the filing of the Contempt Motion was itself improper and unsupported by law. Based on the record of the March 28, 2018, and June 13, 2018, hearings, the record reflects that the issuance of an OSC against the Debtor for his conduct in the filing of the Contempt Motion is justified.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the motion in part for issuance of the OSC and DENY the motion in part regarding the enforcement of the MSA.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jay J. Goodman Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Delia Moya Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-17888

Jay J. Goodman

Chapter 7 #9.00 CONT Order to show cause why Christopher Hewitt should not be sanctioned for filing frivolous pleading against Delia Moya

From: 6/6/18, 6/13/18 Also #8

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling:

6/27/2018

BACKGROUND

On August 31, 2016, Jay Goodman ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On December 12, 2016, Debtor received a discharge.

On February 12, 2018, Debtor filed a motion for an order to show cause why Delia Moya ("Moya"), Debtor’s ex-spouse, should not be held in civil contempt. The Court issued a corresponding order to show cause on February 27, 2018 (the "1st OSC"). On March 14, 2018, Moya filed a response to the 1st OSC. After issuing a tentative ruling, the Court, at a hearing on March 28, 2018, orally vacated the 1st OSC. On May 4, 2018, the Court issued an order vacating the 1st OSC and issuing an order to show cause why Debtor’s attorney, Christopher Hewitt ("Hewitt") should not be sanctioned for filing a frivolous pleading (the "2nd OSC").

On May 21, 2018, the hearing on the 2nd OSC was continued for one week by stipulation of the parties. On May 23, 2018, Hewitt filed his opposition to the 2nd OSC. On May 30, 2018, Moya filed a reply, requesting $6,850 for responding to the

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jay J. Goodman

Chapter 7

1st OSC and $2,000 for filing the reply in connection with the 2nd OSC.

On May 31, 2018, Moya filed a motion for attorney fees (the "Motion"). Moya’s Motion primarily requests that Debtor reimburse Moya for $8,350 in attorney’s fees ($6,850 for responding to the 1st OSC and $1,500 for the Motion). The Motion was set for hearing on June 27, 2018.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the reasons set forth in the 2nd OSC and the reply, the Court believes that monetary sanctions are appropriate. Hewitt to address any ethical concerns arising from a possible conflict of interest presented by the instant situation.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jay J. Goodman Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-17350

Dean L. Springer, Sr. and Tami Jo Springer

Chapter 7 #10.00 CONT Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order

From: 8/30/17, 9/20/17, 11/1/17, 12/13/17, 2/7/18, 2/28/18, 3/28/18, 5/9/18,

6/6/18

Docket 148

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Dean L. Springer Sr. Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Tami Jo Springer Pro Se

Movant(s):

Hilder & Associates Represented By

Lei Lei Wang Ekvall

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Richard A Marshack Sarah Cate Hays

D Edward Hays Laila Masud

2:00 PM

6:18-10546

Rick Allen Skans

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01099 LBS Financial Credit Union, a California Corporati v. Skans

#11.00 Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01099. Complaint by LBS Financial CU, a California Corporation against Rick Allen Skans. Willful and malicious injury

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rick Allen Skans Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Defendant(s):

Rick Allen Skans Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

LBS Financial Credit Union, a Represented By Karel G Rocha

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-19010

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01020 SCE Federal Credit Union v. Durham

#12.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by SCE Federal Credit Union against Sara Durham. (14 ),(14A) priority tax claims)), 62 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud

From: 3/21/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sara Durham Represented By

Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Sara Durham Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By

Bruce P. Needleman

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-15043

Sandra Lou Harter

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01040 Cisneros v. Harter et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by A. Cisneros against Joseph Harter, Connie Flach, John Rose, Tammy Rose, Brennan Rose, KayLynne Rose. (Charge To Estate - $350.00) .- Complaint for: 1) Declaratory Relief; 2) Turnover of Property; and 3) Sale of Interest of Co-Owner in Property of the Estate [11 U.S.C. §§ 363 and 542] - Nature of Suit: 91 - Declaratory judgment, 11 Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property, 31 - Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h)

(Defendant Connie Flach Dismissed 6/5/18) (Defendant John Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant Tammy Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant Brennan Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant KayLynne Rose Dismissed 6/20/18)

From: 4/25/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

06/27/2018

The Status Conference is CONTINUED to August 22, 2018, 2:00 p.m. per the Plaintiff's request for time to finalize a settlement.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford

Defendant(s):

Joseph Harter Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sandra Lou Harter

Todd L Turoci

Chapter 7

John Rose Represented By

Dina Farhat

Tammy Rose Represented By

Dina Farhat

Brennan Rose Represented By Dina Farhat

KayLynne Rose Represented By Dina Farhat

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy

2:00 PM

6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01096 Pringle v. Bank of the West

#14.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01096. Complaint by John Pringle against Bank of the West. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 544(b)( and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05; (2) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B); (3) Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; and (4) Disallowance of Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502 Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Goe, Robert)

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III

Defendant(s):

Bank of the West Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

John Pringle Represented By

Robert P Goe

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

2:00 PM

6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01085 PRINGLE v. Winn et al

#15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01085. Complaint by JOHN P PRINGLE against Ralph Winn. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). and other Defendants including DOES 1-25 Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13-Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer, 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property,14 - Recovery of money/property - other, 91- Declaratory judgment)

From: 7/12/17, 8/23/17, 10/25/17, 5/16/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/26/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III

Defendant(s):

Ralph Winn Represented By

Douglas A Plazak

Sterling Security Service, Inc. Represented By Seth W Wiener

Natalia V Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener

Steven B Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener

Stacy Winn Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Douglas A Plazak

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

JOHN P PRINGLE Represented By Charity J Manee Robert P Goe

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

2:00 PM

6:13-30625

John Martin Mata

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01089 Mata et al v. National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1 et a

#16.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01089. Complaint by John Martin Mata, Livier Mata against National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1, NATIONAL COLLEGIATE STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2006-4, National Collegiate

Student Loan Trust 2007-1. (Charge To Estate) - Filing Fee Not Required. Determination of Discharge Under 11 U.S.C. Sect 523(a)(8) Nature of Suit: 63 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(8), student loan, 91 - Declaratory judgment.

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 2:00 PM.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Martin Mata Represented By Michael E Clark

Defendant(s):

National Collegiate Student Loan Represented By

Damian P Richard

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE Represented By Damian P Richard

National Collegiate Student Loan Represented By

Damian P Richard

Joint Debtor(s):

Livier Mata Represented By

Michael E Clark

2:00 PM

CONT...

John Martin Mata

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

John Martin Mata Represented By Michael E Clark

Livier Mata Represented By

Michael E Clark

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se

3:00 PM

6:13-27610

Baleine LP

Chapter 7 #17.00 CONT Motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Revere Fin. Corp. v. Roger

Docket Number INC 092 308 Riverside County Superior Court MOVANT: JERRY WANG AS RECEIVER

From: 6/5/18 EH

Docket 468

Tentative Ruling:

06/27/2018

Debtors and Dr. Roger (the "Roger Parties") oppose relief from stay only as to determination of postpetition fees/costs by the State Court.

Postpetition, as to Motion for Allowance of Administrative Expense Claim, the Roger Parties assert that this Court already determined the value of the Receiver’s postpetition services in connection with the Receiver Fee Motion and that the Receiver disagreed with this Court’s ruling. The Roger Parties couch the Receiver’s request for relief from stay as forum shopping. The Roger Parties’ also argue that the District Court opinions are not binding because the time lapse between the time when the District Court issued its opinions, and the numerous issues that have been litigated in the Bankruptcy Court in the interim, militate in favor of a bankruptcy court determination of postpetition fees.

As a threshold matter, the Court’s ruling on the Receiver Fee Motion is incorrectly characterized by the Roger Parties as a determination on the value of the Receiver’s claim for postpetition fees, where the Court’s decision instead clearly indicated was without prejudice and detailed deficiencies in the form of the Motion and the standard argued by the Receiver, but left open the possibility of the Receiver revising and bringing its motion again at a later date. The Court now considers the remaining arguments of the Roger Parties in light of the Curtis Factors.

3:00 PM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

Partial or Complete Resolution of Issues

First, the Roger Parties’ arguments amount to an assertion that there are bankruptcy issues such as priority of claims and benefit to the estates that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which cannot be resolved by a state action. On this point, the Movants do not dispute that bankruptcy issues will remain after the State Court has determined the total amount of all fees and costs, including postpetition amounts. However, the Movants underscore that the State Court is in the best position to determine, as a matter of state law, the total amount and allocation of Receiver/RFC’s fees/expenses and costs. The Court concurs with the Movants that relief from stay is likely to result in at least partial resolution of issues regarding the total amount of fees/expenses and costs RFC and Receiver are owed. Following such determinations, the parties can and will likely come before this Court for decisions regarding the allowance and priority of such claims. On the whole, the Court considers this factor neutral.

Whether there is lack of any connection with or interference with administration of the bankruptcy case

Movants do not argue that the calculation of fees lacks connection with the bankruptcy case, they simply argue that the State Court is the appropriate forum for calculation of such fees and costs. The Court agrees that the State Court is the appropriate forum for determination of the total amount of costs and fees and does not find that the Roger Parties have provided any argument indicating that such determination by the State Court would interfere with the bankruptcy cases. To the contrary, the Court finds that determination, in the first instance, by the State Court of the total amount of fees and costs awardable under state law is proper and that the interests of judicial economy favor such determination by the State Court prior to determination by this Court regarding the priority of such claims and other potential bankruptcy-related disputes over fees and costs. This factor weighs in favor of granting relief from stay.

Prejudice to Interests of Other Creditors and Other Interested Parties/ Balance of Hurt

The only prejudice asserted by the Roger Parties, is prejudice to Dr. Roger.

3:00 PM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

Specifically, the Roger Parties argue that Dr. Roger will be harmed by having to litigate the issue of postpetition fees and costs in the State Court before the issue of his entitlement to a discharge has been resolved. The corollary argument is that if Dr. Roger obtains a discharge at least some of the fees/costs will not need to be paid by Dr. Roger. The Roger Parties opine that the delay in determination of the discharge issue has been the result of a strategy by the Movants. However, this Court has already determined with respect to the Dischargeability Action that Dr. Roger’s consent to numerous continuances of the Dischargeability Action preclude him from arguing that the Movants are at fault for the time delay in reaching resolution of that case. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that as Dr. Roger would likely need to litigate the issue of postpetition fees/costs in either the State Court or in this Court, that the arguments regarding harm are inapposite and may need to determine fees as against Ebarb. This factor weighs in favor of granting relief from stay.

Third Parties

The Court further notes that the presence of Ebarb in the State Court Action complicates the ability of the Court to make a determination regarding fees/costs of the Movants where issues related directly to a non-debtor party may be implicated. This factor weighs in favor of granting relief.

Judicial Economy

Based on the Roger Parties’ nonopposition to the State Court’s determination of prepetition fees/costs, the issue of fees and costs will already move forward before the State Court. Additionally, as set forth above, the State Court is in the best position to determine the total award of fees and costs pursuant to state law and such determination is in the interests of judicial economy because it will limit this Court’s review to narrow bankruptcy related issues. For these reasons, judicial economy weighs in favor of granting relief from stay.

The Court finds that the remaining Curtis factors are inapplicable to the case at bar and that the remaining legal arguments of the Roger Parties are not relevant to a determination of whether the Curtis Factors support granting or denial of relief from stay.

TENTATIVE RULING

3:00 PM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay to Movants.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

6/5/2018

On October 24, 2013, Baleine, LP ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Prior to the bankruptcy filing, on March 18, 2013, the state court had appointed Jerry Wang ("Wang") as receiver of the personal property assets of Debtor, as well as the personal property assets of Douglas Roger ("Roger") and Roger’s medical corporation ("Roger Inc."). Wang now asserts that "nothing remains for [Wang] to do in terms of administering the receivership." [Dkt. No. 469, pg. 4, lines 8-9]. Wang has filed this instant motion for relief from the automatic stay in order to wind down the receivership. Both Trustee and Debtor have filed limited oppositions to the request.

Trustee requests that

to the extent Movant intends to seek to be paid an administrative expense claim in the Debtor’s case based on any services performed in the state court action, any orders/judgments obtained from the state court concerning Movant’s fees, expenses, and costs would not excuse Movant from compliance with 11 U.S.C. § 503, such that Movant’s fees, expenses, and costs would still be subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court.

[Dkt. No. 472, pg. 2, lines 9-13]. Wang’s reply indicates that he accepts the condition requested by Trustee, and, therefore, the Court considers the limited objection of Trustee to be resolved.

Debtor’s limited opposition, however, remains unresolved. Debtor’s opposition states that Debtor

3:00 PM

CONT...

Baleine LP

related bankruptcy cases all before this Court, as well as the fact that application of bankruptcy law is needed to make these post-petition determinations and allocations between the related debtors.

Chapter 7

[Dkt. No. 474, section 3b(11)].

The Court notes that the district court has previous weighed in on similar issues in Roger’s bankruptcy. See In re Roger, 539 B.R. 837 (C.D. Cal. 2015); In re Roger, 2015 WL 7566647 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (pending appeal). While the Court disagrees with the blanket assertion offered by Wang that "[t]he District Court held that issues relating to the receivership are complex areas of state law that the State Court should decide," [Dkt. No. 469, pg. 5, lines 4-6], the Court agrees with Wang that the district court’s rationale is relevant here. Specifically, Court respects the district court’s conclusion that "the State Court, which presided over years of litigation involving numerous discovery disputes and the incurrence of $1,000,000 in attorneys’ fees, is better suited to resolve the issues." 2015 WL 7566647 at *10.1 This conclusion is specifically relevant because the primary basis of the unresolved objection of Debtor is that this Court is more familiar with the applicable law and facts. In accordance with the district court’s opinion, the Court disagrees with Debtor’s conclusion.

Debtor has also raised concerns regarding appropriately allocation expenses between the bankruptcy estates of Baleine, Roger, and Roger Inc. This concern, however, does not appear to be of high significance at this point in time, since those concerns could be litigated in the context of either a claim objection or an application for administrative fees. As conceded by Wang, "cause exists to grant relief from stay for a state court to first determine the total amount of a creditor’s claim/debtor’s liability. The effect of that determination on a bankruptcy estate is an issue of bankruptcy law for the bankruptcy court to decide on a later date." [Dkt. No. 477, pg. 2, lines 22-25].

In accordance with the rationale set forth in in the district court opinions of In re Roger, 539 B.R. 837 (C.D. Cal. 2015) and In re Roger, 2015 WL 7566647 (C.D. Cal.

3:00 PM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

2015) and the reasons set forth in Wang’s moving papers, and noting that Wang has agreed to the condition requested by Trustee, and further noting that the argument of Debtor has either been rejected by the district court or can be determined by this Court at a later time and in a more appropriate setting, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, lifting the automatic stay for Wang to proceed to wind down the receivership in state court.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Baleine LP Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Jerry Wang, Duly-Appointed State Represented By

Jeffrey K Garfinkle Anthony J Napolitano

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

3:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7 #18.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Revere Fin. Corp v. Roger Docket Number INC 092-308 Riverside County Superior Court

MOVANT: REVERE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

From: 6/5/18 Also #19

Docket 626

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

3:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7 #19.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 629 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON- BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Revere Fin Corp. v. Roger Docket Number INC 092 308 Riverside County Superior Court

MOVANT: JERRY WANG, AS RECEIVER

From: 6/5/18 Also #18

Docket 634

Tentative Ruling:

6/5/2018

On October 20, 2013, Douglas J. Roger, MD, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Prior to the bankruptcy filing, on March 18, 2013, the state court had appointed Jerry Wang ("Wang") as receiver of the personal property assets of Debtor, as well as the personal property assets of Douglas Roger ("Roger") and Baleine, LP ("Baleine"). Wang now asserts that "nothing remains for [Wang] to do in terms of administering the receivership." [Dkt. No. 469, pg. 4, lines 8-9]. Wang has filed this instant motion for relief from the automatic stay in order to wind down the receivership. Both Trustee and Debtor have filed limited oppositions to the request.

Trustee requests that

3:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

compliance with 11 U.S.C. § 503, such that Movant’s fees, expenses, and costs would still be subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court.

Chapter 7

[Dkt. No. 472, pg. 2, lines 9-13]. Wang’s reply indicates that he accepts the condition requested by Trustee, and, therefore, the Court considers the limited objection of Trustee to be resolved.

Debtor’s limited opposition, however, remains unresolved. Debtor’s opposition states that Debtor

only opposes relief from stay for Movant to have the State Court determine post-petition fees, costs and any applicable interest, if any, on its claim, as this Court is better situated to make this determination, both because it is intimately familiar with the post-petition actions taken by Movant in the related bankruptcy cases all before this Court, as well as the fact that application of bankruptcy law is needed to make these post-petition determinations and allocations between the related debtors.

[Dkt. No. 474, section 3b(11)].

3:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Debtor has also raised concerns regarding appropriately allocation expenses between the bankruptcy estates of Debtor, Roger, and Baleine. This concern, however, does not appear to be of high significance at this point in time, since those concerns could be litigated in the context of either a claim objection or an application for administrative fees. As conceded by Wang, "cause exists to grant relief from stay for a state court to first determine the total amount of a creditor’s claim/debtor’s liability. The effect of that determination on a bankruptcy estate is an issue of bankruptcy law for the bankruptcy court to decide on a later date." [Dkt. No. 477, pg. 2, lines 22-25].

In accordance with the rationale set forth in in the district court opinions of In re Roger, 539 B.R. 837 (C.D. Cal. 2015) and In re Roger, 2015 WL 7566647 (C.D. Cal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Movant(s):

Jerry Wang, Duly-Appointed State Represented By

Jeffrey K Garfinkle

3:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Joseph M Welch Brian T Harvey Anthony J Napolitano

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:17-18792

Roman Negrete Manrriquez

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01093 Negrete Manrriquez v. BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE

#1.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint by Roman Negrete Manrriquez against BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION, its assignees and/or successors, JP Morgan Chase Bank, SPS Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.. (Fee Not Required). (Attachments: # 1 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 1 # 2 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 2 (part 1) # 3 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 2 (part 2) # 4 COMPLAINT -

EXHIBIT 2 (part 3) # 5 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 3) Nature of Suit: 72 - Injunctive relief - other, 91 - Declaratory judgment

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/30/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles

Defendant(s):

BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL Pro Se

JP Morgan Chase Bank Pro Se

SPS Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Plaintiff(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles Timothy D Murphy

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-10322

Marianne Bowers

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion for Authority to Sell or Refinance Real Property under LBR 3015-1 (Ch 13)-No Fee Notice of Opportunity To Request A Hearing on Motion [LBR 9013-1(o)]

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Marianne Bowers Represented By Thomas B Ure

Movant(s):

Marianne Bowers Represented By Thomas B Ure

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-18449

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Chapter 13 #3.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant LVNV Funding, LLC Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee of CVF Consumer Acquisition Company Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee and Subsequent Transferees

Also #4 EH

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:

6/28/18

BACKGROUND:

On June 30, 2014, Juan & Maria Alba ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On July 31, 2014, LVNV Funding, LLC ("Creditor") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $7,598.47("Claim 2"). That same day, Creditor also filed an additional unsecured claim in the amount of $836.99 ("Claim 3"). On August 11, 2014, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Chapter 13

F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:

Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—

11:00 AM

CONT...

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

(1) such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;

Chapter 13

CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337 (2016) provides a statute of limitations of four years for debts founded on written contracts, book accounts, accounts stated based upon account in writing, "balance of mutual, open and current account in writing," and rescission of written contract. Once the statute of limitations has passed, the claim is unenforceable. See e.g., Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U.S. 126 (1938).

Claim 2 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identifies a last transaction date of October 30, 2000. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 2 is unenforceable.

Claim 3 is based on "retail" debt. The claim’s supporting documentation suggests that the claim fits within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of December 15, 2000. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 3 is unenforceable. Furthermore, the Court deems failure to oppose to be consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Party Information

Chapter 13

Juan Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Juan Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Maria Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-18449

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Chapter 13 #4.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 3 by Claimant LVNV Funding, LLC Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee of Arrow Financial Services, LLC Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee

Also #3 EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

6/28/18

BACKGROUND:

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Chapter 13

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:

(b) Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—

11:00 AM

CONT...

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

(1) such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;

Chapter 13

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 3.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Juan Alba and Maria Alba

Party Information

Chapter 13

Juan Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Juan Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Maria Alba Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16946

Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Yvette Blue Represented By

Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Movant(s):

Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Yvette Blue Represented By

Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion of U.S. Trustee for the Entry of an Order Requiring Nationstar Mortgage LLC to Provide an Escrow Account Reconciliation Statement & Related Relief

Docket 113

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/30/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson

Joint Debtor(s):

Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-20229

Sean Phillip Coy

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Certificate Trustee on Behalf of Bosco Credit II Trust Series 2010-1

From: 3/1/18 Also #8 & #9 EH

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:

3/1/18

On February 28, 2005, Debtor executed two notes and deeds of trust. One had an original amount of $500,000, and the current beneficiary is FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1. The other had an original amount of $106,280, and the current beneficiary is Deutsche Bank National Trust Company ("Deutsche"). The security interest related to the latter is the subject of the lien avoidance motion here.

Deutsche asserts that Debtor and the first lienholder entered into a modification on June 1, 2013, and that such modification prejudiced the rights of Deutsche. Deutsche contends that the modification was without its permission, and that the senior lienholder relinquished its priority with respect to the modified terms. If Deutsche is correct, then Deutsche would not be wholly unsecured and Debtor’s motion would be unsuccessful.

Subject to discussion from the parties, the Court is inclined to GRANT Deutsche’s request for a continuance to allow Deutsche to file an adversary proceeding regarding the extent or priority of a lien.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Sean Phillip Coy

Chapter 13

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Movant(s):

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-20229

Sean Phillip Coy

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with Morgan Hill Homeowners Association (Assessment Lien)

Also #7 & #9 EH

Docket 111

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Movant(s):

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-20229

Sean Phillip Coy

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 2/15/18, 3/1/18

Also #7 & #8 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11653

Richard Espinoza

Chapter 13 #10.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 5 by Claimant LVNV Funding, LLC Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee of North Star Capital Acquisition LLC Its Successors and Assigns as Assignee and Subsequent Transferees

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:

6/28/18

BACKGROUND:

On March 1, 2018, Richard Espinoza ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On May 3, 2018, LVNV Funding, LLC ("Creditor") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $1,557.40 ("Claim 5"). On May 12, 2018, Debtor filed an objection to claim 5. On May 30, 2018, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing

11:00 AM

CONT...

Richard Espinoza

Chapter 13

upon a motion for relief. Id.

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1) (2005) states:

Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that—
1. such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than

11:00 AM

CONT...

Richard Espinoza

because such claim is contingent or unmatured;

Chapter 13

Claim 5 is based on "credit card" debt. This appears to fit within the category established by CAL. CODE CIV. P. § 337. Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years. The proof of claim identified a last transaction date of June 15, 1999. This is more than four years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, and, therefore, Claim 5 is unenforceable.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 5.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Espinoza Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Richard Espinoza Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Richard Espinoza

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14689

Moises Cortez

Chapter 13 #11.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1661 Via Bello Dr., Rialto, CA 92377

MOVANT: MOISES CORTEZ

Docket 22

Tentative Ruling:

6/28/2018

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for failure to provide adequate notice and execute proper service. First, Debtor failed to provide telephonic notice of the hearing to secured creditors in accordance with the terms of order setting hearing on shortened notice. Additionally, Debtor provided written notice of the hearing the day after the deadline specified in the order setting hearing on shortened notice, and also failed to serve the secured creditors pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004 as required by the Court’s self-calendaring procedures.

As to the merits, there is no detail presented as to the reasons the prior case was dismissed, or to Debtor’s changed circumstances. Finally, there is no declaration by Debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Moises Cortez Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

Moises Cortez Represented By Neil R Hedtke

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Moises Cortez

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12819

Adrian Lopez and Patricia Lopez

Chapter 13 #12.00 Motion for Setting Property Value of Personal Property Collateral EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

06/28/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 5, 2018, Adrian & Patricia Lopez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Among the assets of the estate is a 2000 Nisan Frontier King Cab (the "Proper"). On May 24, 2018, Debtors a motion to determine the value of the property. No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

One of the benefits of filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy is that under § 506(a) the debtor can bifurcate a secured, unavoidable debt, with one part representing the amount of the value of the collateral, and the deficiency being treated as an unsecured claim. See In re Penrod, 636 F.3d 1175, 1177 (9th Cir. 2011).

The Debtors assert that the Property’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $1,125, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $3,619.08. In support of its valuation, Debtor has provided a Kelley Blue Book valuation for "Trade-in Value".

11:00 AM

CONT...

Adrian Lopez and Patricia Lopez

Chapter 13

Currently, the Ninth Circuit has not established a uniform method for valuations. See In re Ayres, 2010 WL 652825 at *5, 2010 Bankr.LEXIS 519 at *13 (Bankr.N.D.Cal. February 16, 2010) (collecting cases detailing vehicle valuation and describing the state of the law in the Ninth Circuit). In In re Morales, however, which this Court has previously cited with approval, it was determined that retail value should be calculated "by adjusting the Kelley Blue Book or N.A.D.A. Guide retail value for a like vehicle by a reasonable amount in light of the evidence presented regarding the condition of the vehicle or any other relevant factors." In re Morales, 387 B.R. 36, 45 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2008).

According to the court in In re Morales, the retail values, and not the private party or trade-in values, are the appropriate starting points because the text of § 506(a)(2) refers to "the price a retail merchant would charge" and does not refer to the price a private party would charge. Morales at 46. Here, Debtors have failed to provide evidence regarding the retail value of the property. As a result, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for supplemental evidence.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adrian Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Adrian Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

11:00 AM

CONT...

Adrian Lopez and Patricia Lopez

Chapter 13

Patricia Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12236

Michael Anthony Rivera

Chapter 13 #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 5/24/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11993

Anisha Christel Wilson

Chapter 13 #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 5/24/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anisha Christel Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12992

Charles Henry Sacayan and Catherine Angela McNicholas

Chapter 13 #15.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 21 Motion to Avoid JUNIOR LIEN with Trinity Financial Services, LLC

From: 6/7/18 Also #16

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling:

6/28/18

The parties dispute whether the fair market value of the real property located at 32283 Daisy Dr., Winchester, CA 92596 is worth more or less than the amount owing on the first deed of trust. The Court having reviewed the evidence submitted by Debtor, as well as the evidence submitted by the holder of the second deed of trust, Trinity Financial Services, LLC ("Trinity"), and finds the latter to be more compelling for the following reasons. First, Debtor has not submitted an appraiser’s declaration authenticating the appraisal. Second, Debtor’s "appraisal" is simply a comparative market analysis which identifies 14 comparable listings which sold for an average of

$443,750, then concludes that the real property at issue here is only worth $393,000, without any explanation. The appraisal provided by Trinity, on the other hand, contains an appraiser’s declaration, utilizes a more thorough methodology, and arrives at a conclusion more compatible with the comparable sales. As a result, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Henry Sacayan Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charles Henry Sacayan and Catherine Angela McNicholas

Chapter 13

Joint Debtor(s):

Catherine Angela McNicholas Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Movant(s):

Charles Henry Sacayan Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Catherine Angela McNicholas Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12992

Charles Henry Sacayan and Catherine Angela McNicholas

Chapter 13 #16.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Also #15 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Charles Henry Sacayan Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Joint Debtor(s):

Catherine Angela McNicholas Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13193

Richard Garavito

Chapter 13 #17.00 CONT Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 13 to 11 From: 5/24/18

Also #18 EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian

Movant(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13193

Richard Garavito

Chapter 13 #18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Also #17 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13268

Oscar Franco and Edubijes Franco

Chapter 13 #19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Oscar Franco Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Edubijes Franco Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13 #20.00 Motion for Setting Property Value Also #21

Docket 39

Tentative Ruling:

06/28/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 20, 2018, Robert Ridge ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Among the assets of the estate is a 2013 Toyota Camry (the "Property"). On June 6, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to determine the value of the Property ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 3012 requires a motion to value collateral to be served on the holder of the secured claim. Here, the proof of service to the instant motion [Dkt. No. 39, pg. 8] only indicates that service was executed on the Debtor, his attorney, the Chapter 13 Trustee and UST.

Additionally, the Court notes that the only evidence in support of Debtor’s proposed valuation is a declaration of Debtor which asserts that Debtor relied upon personal

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13

knowledge and Kelley Blue Book. Debtor has not provided any exhibit, however, containing Kelly Blue Book estimates. For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Movant(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13 #21.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Also #20 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13335

Annabelle M. Vigil

Chapter 13 #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Tracie Sonnier Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13419

Mark F. Costello and Carol D. Costello

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/14/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark F. Costello Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Carol D. Costello Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13453

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/14/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Amy Corinne Ames Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13503

John L Velasquez and Christi J Velasquez

Chapter 13 #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Miguel Pinedo Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Laura Pinedo Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13683

Ramon Angel Moyano and Alicia Cortes Moyano

Chapter 13 #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ramon Angel Moyano Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Alicia Cortes Moyano Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13684

Carlos Jesus Garcia and Mirna Cloris Garcia

Chapter 13 #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Carlos Jesus Garcia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Mirna Cloris Garcia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13698

Quynhgiao N Tran

Chapter 13 #43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/21/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Quynhgiao N Tran Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13714

Jose Martinez and Aurora Martinez

Chapter 13 #44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Aurora Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13715

Jennifer Elaine Sackett

Chapter 13 #45.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jennifer Elaine Sackett Represented By Brian C Andrews

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13730

Candelario P Hernandez

Chapter 13 #46.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/21/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Diana L Montoya Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13745

Noemi Meraz Espinoza

Chapter 13 #50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/21/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Mario Portillo Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11981

Victorio Roman Manabat and Sheila Rosales Manabat

Chapter 13 #54.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 5/24/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Victorio Roman Manabat Represented By John A Varley

Joint Debtor(s):

Sheila Rosales Manabat Represented By John A Varley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:13-28666

Mildred Goodridge Crawford

Chapter 13 #55.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 212

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mildred Goodridge Crawford Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-23388

Jose N Recinos and Patricia Recinos

Chapter 13 #56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 277

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose N Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-24807

Bryan K. Harrison and Dawn Harrison

Chapter 13 #57.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 5/24/18

Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-18531

Victor Manuel Rosales

Chapter 13 #63.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 5/24/18, 6/14/18

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/25/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Victor Manuel Rosales Represented By

D Justin Harelik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20019

Frank Prouty

Chapter 13 #64.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 5/24/18

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Frank Prouty Represented By

Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Tuesday, July 3, 2018

Hearing Room

303

2:00 PM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01100 Zamucen & Curren LLP v. Johnson

#1.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01100. Complaint by Zamucen & Curren LLP against Vance Zachary Johnson . (d),(e)))

Docket 1

MOVANT: JOSE & LILIAN VELASCO

From: 6/5/18, 6/26/18 EH

Docket 9

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Velasco Represented By

Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King

Movant(s):

Jose Velasco Represented By

Daniel King

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12236

Michael Anthony Rivera

Chapter 13 #5.00 CONT Motion to Avoid Property Lien with Internal Revenue Service From: 5/24/18

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/20/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera

Movant(s):

Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12932

Eddie Fitz

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eddie Fitz Represented By

Brian C Andrews

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13851

Kimberly Michelle Giron

Chapter 13 #7.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Bennett Averett Represented By John D Monte

Joint Debtor(s):

Nora Lee Averett Represented By John D Monte

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13924

Sandra Lorena Parra

Chapter 13 #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sandra Lorena Parra Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13956

Joel V. Fierros

Chapter 13 #14.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 5/29/18

Party Information

Joel V. Fierros Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13970

Vadany Sophan

Chapter 13 #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vadany Sophan Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13981

Cabrini Haynes

Chapter 7 #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Wallace Stanton Miles Represented By

Stuart G Steingraber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14079

Stephan D. Clark

Chapter 13 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/15/18

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14149

Alfredo Pena and Veronica Pena

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alfredo Pena Represented By

Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Veronica Pena Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14164

Charles Williams, III

Chapter 13 #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Williams, III Represented By Stephen L Burton

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14229

John Forest Harmon, Jr. and Margaret Anne Vieyra-

Chapter 13 #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Forest Harmon Jr. Represented By David Lozano

Joint Debtor(s):

Margaret Anne Vieyra-Harmon Represented By David Lozano

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-10761

Ronald Wayne Cloyd

Chapter 13 #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By Jonathan D Doan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-24807

Bryan K. Harrison and Dawn Harrison

Chapter 13 #34.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 5/24/18, 6/28/18

Docket 113

Chapter 13 #38.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case - Delinquency From: 6/4/18

Docket 24

Party Information

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

The Court, having considered the motion and the evidence contained therein and finding such to be sufficient to overcome the presumption of bad faith arising under 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3), is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINUING the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Henry M Gutierrez Represented By Luke Jackson

Joint Debtor(s):

Mitzy D Gutierrez Represented By Luke Jackson

Movant(s):

Henry M Gutierrez Represented By Luke Jackson

Mitzy D Gutierrez Represented By Luke Jackson

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Henry M Gutierrez and Mitzy D Gutierrez

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15033

Victor Portillo

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ALL PROPERTY

MOVANT: VICTOR PORTILLO

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Victor Portillo Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Victor Portillo Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15026

Joe R Garcia

Chapter 13 #3.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 15420 Bello Way, Moreno Valley, CA 92555

MOVANT: JOE R GARCIA

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

The Court finding that the Debtor having failed to serve Citimortgage to the attention of an officer and via certified mail as required pursuant to Rule 7004(h), the hearing on the Motion shall be CONTINUED. Additionally, on page 1 of the Motion, Citi was not indicated as the party entitled to Notice. Finally, the Declaration attached is from Debtor’s counsel, not from the Debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe R Garcia Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

Joe R Garcia Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15020

Miriam Torres

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY

MOVANT: MIRIAM TORRES

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

A comparison between the Debtor’s Schedules I and J for the current and prior case does not substantiate the additional income from roommates asserted by the Debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Miriam Torres Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Miriam Torres Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15009

Anissa Jean Bridges

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 29605 Solana Way, #K-2, Temecula, CA 92591

MOVANT: 29605 SOLANA WAY LLC

Also #6 EH

Docket 9

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anissa Jean Bridges Pro Se

Movant(s):

29605 SOLANA WAY, LLC Represented By Scott Andrews

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15009

Anissa Jean Bridges

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1410 Synergy, Irvine, CA 92614

MOVANT: FAIRFIELD VON KARMAN LLC

Also #5 EH

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anissa Jean Bridges Pro Se

Movant(s):

FAIRFIELD VON KARMAN LLC Represented By

Scott Andrews

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15007

Corinthia A. Williams

Chapter 13 #7.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property

MOVANT: CORINTHIA A. WILLIAMS

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

The Court, having considered the improper service and the evidence contained therein and finding such to be sufficient to overcome the presumption of bad faith arising under 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3), is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINUING the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14940

Daniel Davison

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 12019 Cherry Lane Whitewater, CA 92882

MOVANT: JAMES PRATER

CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/18

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Daniel Davison Pro Se

Movant(s):

James Prater Represented By

Barry L O'Connor

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14603

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Chapter 13 #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2005 Ford Excursion with Exhibits A- C

MOVANT: CALIFORNIA COAST CREDIT UNION

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. APO request DENIED as moot. Request under § 362(d)(2) is DENIED for lack of evidence as to value or prospect for reorganization.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Joint Debtor(s):

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Movant(s):

California Coast Credit Union Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Lisa S Yun

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14527

Anthony Benitez

Chapter 7 #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Yamaha XVS95CGCL

MOVANT: YAMAHA MOTOR FINANCE CORP

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anthony Benitez Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Yamaha Motor Finance Corp. Represented By Karel G Rocha

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14509

Antonio Saavedra

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2015 Chevrolet Silverado Vin # 1GCUKSEC4FF198288)

MOVANT: ALLY BANK

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Antonio Saavedra Represented By Hector Vega

Movant(s):

Ally Bank Represented By

Adam N Barasch

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14465

Eric Yanez and Adriana Yanez

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Ford Edge, VIN 2FMPK4AP6HBB61955

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eric Yanez Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Adriana Yanez Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By

Sheryl K Ith

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Eric Yanez and Adriana Yanez

Chapter 7

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14243

Tiffany L Hamm

Chapter 7 #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2009 Hyundai Elantra, VIN KMHDU46D09U691586

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Tiffany L Hamm Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14135

William Meineke and Kathie Meineke

Chapter 13 #14.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 29290 First Green, Lake Elsinore, CA, 92530

MOVANT: WILLIAM MEINEKE AND KATHIE MEINEKE

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion, as filing was not timely. The motion must be filed and heard within 30 days the Petition Date.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker

Joint Debtor(s):

Kathie Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker

Movant(s):

William Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker Todd B Becker

Kathie Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

William Meineke and Kathie Meineke

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14114

Athenne Devena Musni

Chapter 13 #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 INFINITI Q50, VIN # JN1BV7AP6FM350753

MOVANT: NISSAN INFINITI LT

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request to lift § 1301 stay. Request for APO DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Athenne Devena Musni Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Movant(s):

NISSAN-INFINITI LT. Represented By

Michael D Vanlochem

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14075

Richard Gaines and Natalie Lomeli

Chapter 7 #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Dodge Ram 3500, VIN 3C63R3ML2EG115914

MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE LLC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Gaines Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Natalie Lomeli Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Richard Gaines and Natalie Lomeli

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14038

Christopher Michael Hafer

Chapter 7 #17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Chevrolet Silverado

MOVANT: BANK OF THE WEST

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher Michael Hafer Represented By Joel M Feinstein

Movant(s):

Bank of the West Represented By

Mary Ellmann Tang

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13913

Christine Irene Huff

Chapter 7 #18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Ford F150, Vehicle Identification Number: 1FTFW1CTXDFD69472

MOVANT: FIRST TECH FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christine Irene Huff Represented By Morton J Grabel

Movant(s):

First Tech Federal Credit Union Represented By Nichole Glowin

Trustee(s):

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13775

Maria D Lopez Ramirez

Chapter 7 #19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 6349 Emmerton Ln, Highland, CA

MOVANT: GLOBAL AZ INVESTING INC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Maria D Lopez Ramirez Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Movant(s):

Global Az Investing, Inc Represented By Robert A Krasney

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13120

Ana Maria Flores

Chapter 7 #20.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2049 W. Gilbert Street, San Bernardino, CA 92411

MOVANT: NEW PENN FINANCIAL LLC

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3 permitting Movant to offer loan workout options.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ana Maria Flores Pro Se

Movant(s):

New Penn Financial LLC d/b/a Represented By Mark S Krause

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13087

Steven Robert Smith

Chapter 7 #21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 38522 Fallbrook Ave Palm Desert CA 92211

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3 permitting Movant to offer loan workout options.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Steven Robert Smith Represented By Robert L Firth

Movant(s):

Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12816

Steven Alvarez and Catalina J Alvarez

Chapter 7 #22.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12772 Spring Mountain Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Steven Alvarez Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Catalina J Alvarez Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Movant(s):

HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Nancy L Lee

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Steven Alvarez and Catalina J Alvarez

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12774

Tatiana Noemi Alegre

Chapter 13 #23.00 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property 17253 Emerson St, Victorville, CA 92394.

MOVANT: TATIANA NOEMI ALEGRE aka RICK ALEGRE

From: 5/29/18 EH

Docket 21

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/5/18

Tentative Ruling:

05/29/2018

The Motion was not served on any creditors. As such the Motion must at the outset be denied for a failure to provide creditors with due process.

The Opposition argues that the Debtor has failed to demonstrate changed circumstances and that the Motion is untimely. As to the first argument, the Court concurs. The only "change in circumstances" indicated by the Debtor is that she has now hired counsel. However, there is no explanation of why counsel for the second and third case did not verify the petition was complete when the documents were filed.

As to the second grounds indicated by the Opposition, the Court does not read § 362(c) as requiring a motion to impose the stay to be heard within 30 days of the petition day, it must only be filed prior to the expiration of the 30-day period. Here, the Motion was timely.

The Reply does not cure the service issues and responds only by offering objecting creditor an APO.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

10:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Tatiana Noemi Alegre

Chapter 13

Tatiana Noemi Alegre Represented By LeRoy Roberson

Movant(s):

Tatiana Noemi Alegre Represented By LeRoy Roberson LeRoy Roberson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12485

Robert Thomas Gonzales

Chapter 7 #24.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8534 Melosa Way, Riverside, California 92504-4061

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶3.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Thomas Gonzales Represented By Brad Weil

Movant(s):

The Bank of New York Mellon FKA Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10467

Wayman L Guider

Chapter 13 #25.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2756 La Salle Pointe, Chino Hills, CA 91709

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

The Debtor asserts that there is a sufficient equity cushion to protect Movant and requests an APO and opportunity to cure the missed May and June mortgage payments. The Debtor, however, has inadequately explained the reason for the defaults.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Wayman L Guider Pro Se

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-20367

Charles Lee Dismukes

Chapter 13 #26.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40456 Windsor Road Temecula, California 92591

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/19/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Lee Dismukes Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. et al, Represented By

S Renee Sawyer Blume Asya Landa

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-17531

Harvey Everett Mosely and Jean Ann Mosely

Chapter 13 #27.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 16870 Merion Lane, Fontana, CA 92336

MOVANT: DITECH FINANCIAL LLC

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to indicate status of APO negotiations. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Harvey Everett Mosely Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Jean Ann Mosely Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

DITECH FINANCIAL LLC Represented By Julie Griffis Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-16409

Jesse Norman Dofelmire and Roucelle Frias Dofelmire

Chapter 13 #28.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 BMW 3 Series Sedan 4D 320i

MOVANT: BMW BANK OF NORTH AMERICA

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/9/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesse Norman Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford

Joint Debtor(s):

Roucelle Frias Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

BMW Bank of North America Represented By Bret D. Allen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-16230

Tarra Marie Castillo

Chapter 13 #29.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2015 Chevrolet Equinox Vin# 2GNALBEK9F6256212)

MOVANT: ALLY BANK

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Tarra Marie Castillo Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Movant(s):

Ally Bank Represented By

Adam N Barasch

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-12157

Paulo Cesar Machuca

Chapter 13 #30.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17943 Valerian Way, San Bernardino, CA 92407

MOVANT: MOUNTAIN WEST FINANCIAL, INC.

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: no

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to ¶¶ 3 and 6. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Paulo Cesar Machuca Represented By Scott Kosner

Movant(s):

Mountain West Financial, Inc., its Represented By

Michelle R Ghidotti Kristin A Zilberstein

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-11658

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Chapter 13 #31.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 2/6/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18, 5/8/18, 6/5/18 EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

2/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because it is unclear if effective service was made upon "borrower" Anthony Elie. Furthermore, because Anthony Elie is not a party to the note he is not a co-debtor within the meaning of the statute.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank National Association Represented By

Armin M Kolenovic

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Jamie D Hanawalt

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-20773

Idalia Temblador-Baisa

Chapter 13 #32.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Chevrolet Truck Captiva Sport Utility 4D 2LS 2WD

MOVANT: WOLLEMI ACQUISITIONS, LLC

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request to lift co-debtor stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Idalia Temblador-Baisa Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Wollemi Acquisitions, LLC Represented By Bret D. Allen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-12191

Valicia LaShawn Fennell

Chapter 13 #33.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1330 W 30TH ST San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK

From: 6/5/18 EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Valicia LaShawn Fennell Pro Se

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By

Dane W Exnowski

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-21983

Pablo Javier Solis, Jr. and Norma Alicia Solis

Chapter 7 #34.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Nissan Sentra, VIN 1N4AB7AP5EN855246

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC

Docket 123

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pablo Javier Solis Jr. Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Norma Alicia Solis Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Pablo Javier Solis, Jr. and Norma Alicia Solis

Sheryl K Ith

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-15649

Stefanie Ann Nelson

Chapter 13 #35.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2010 Ford Fusion

MOVANT: BRIDGECREST CREDIT COMPANY LLC

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

There does not appear to be a statement of intention to surrender as an Exhibit as stated in the Motion. Debtor otherwise appears to have cured.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Stefanie Ann Nelson Represented By David Lozano

Movant(s):

Bridgecrest Credit Company, LLC, Represented By

Kristin A Zilberstein

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:13-26000

Maria Elizabeth Venturini

Chapter 13 #36.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 39220 Lillie Circle, Cathedral City, California 92234

MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC

Docket 79

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 6/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maria Elizabeth Venturini Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Movant(s):

Specialized Loan Servicing LLC Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:12-27192

Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle

Chapter 13 #37.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28114 Championship Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92555

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18, 6/5/18 EH

Docket 100

Tentative Ruling:

11/28/2017

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Debtors have provided evidence that regular payments were made between May 2016 and November 1, 2017 (with the exception of the August 2016 and December 2016 payments for which Debtors are seeking evidence). Exhibit 5, which is the Movant’s summary of post-petition payments reflects numerous debits for 2016 payments which appears to corroborate Debtors’ assertion that refunds were made due to a mix-up in payments being made by the Trustee’s office.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Achilles A. LaSalle Jr. Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez

Joint Debtor(s):

Elsie LaSalle Represented By

Lazaro E Fernandez

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle

Chapter 13

HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By

Armin M Kolenovic Debbie Hernandez Rosemary Allen Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By

Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)

2:00 PM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Johnson

#38.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01105. Complaint by Joana Johnson against Vance Zachary Johnson, Goe & Forsythe, LLP. (61 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(5), domestic support)) (Talkov, Scott)

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Defendant(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Plaintiff(s):

Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01106 Bankers Healthcare Group, LLC v. Johnson

#39.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01106. Complaint by Bankers Healthcare Group, LLC against Vance Zachary Johnson. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Defendant(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Plaintiff(s):

Bankers Healthcare Group, LLC Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #40.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Peterbilt 389 and 2016 Cottrell CX-11 Trailer

MOVANT: BALBOA CAPITAL CORPORATION

Also #41 EH

Docket 310

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Balboa Capital Corporation Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #41.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18 Also #40

Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01109 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Titanium Resource Company,

#42.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 - preference,13 Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/21/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a Represented By

Alan W Forsley

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01110 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Larson, D.C., an individual

#43.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against John Larson, D.C., an individual. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers, Avoidance of Improper Distributions, and Unjust Enrichment and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13- Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/21/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

John Larson, D.C., an individual Represented By

Alan W Forsley

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01111 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. American Express Company, a

#44.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01111. Complaint by David

M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against American Express Company, a New York Corporation dba American Express, American Express Travel Related Services, Inc., a New York corporation dba American Express. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Werth, Steven)

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/21/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

American Express Company, a New Pro Se American Express Travel Related Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01112 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Source Medical Billing &

#45.00 Status Conference RE: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Source Medical Billing & Collection, Inc, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Source Medical Billing & Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01113 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Netreva, Inc., a California

#46.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01113. Complaint by David

M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Netreva, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)) (Werth, Steven)

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Netreva, Inc., a California Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01114 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. The Blue Law Group, Inc, a

#47.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01114. Complaint by David

M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against The Blue Law Group, Inc, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)) (Werth, Steven)

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

The Blue Law Group, Inc, a Represented By Michael K Blue

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

10:00 AM

6:18-10883

Alexander Joo

Chapter 7 #1.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Toyota Motor Credit Corporation re 2014 Toyota Sienna

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Alexander Joo Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-11678

Jess Wayne Markham and Marie B Markham

Chapter 7 #2.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Ally Bank; (2016 CHEVROLET TRAVERSE VIN# 1GNKRHKD1GJ234396), In the amount of

$25,099.68

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jess Wayne Markham Represented By Stephen H Darrow

Joint Debtor(s):

Marie B Markham Represented By Stephen H Darrow

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-11992

Sharon R. Walters

Chapter 7 #3.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and JPMorgan Chase Bank NA Re: 2015 Chrysler 200

Docket 12

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 10:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sharon R. Walters Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12035

Vicente Delgado Muro

Chapter 7 #4.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and 21st Mortgage Corporation Re: 1986 Skyline Manufactured Home

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vicente Delgado Muro Represented By Juanita V Miller

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:11-33601

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 Chapter 7 Trustees Motion for Order (1) Approving Compromise of Products Liability Action, (2) Authorizing Employment of Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP As Co-Special Counsel And Payment of Compensation to Co-Special Counsel; and (3) Granting Related Relief Including Disbursements From the Settlement Payment

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

7/11/18

1/31/18

BACKGROUND

On July 21, 2011, John & Carolyn Vega ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On November 2, 2011, Debtors received a discharge and five days later the case was closed.

On March 1, 2017, UST filed a motion to reopen the case to investigate and administer litigation settlement proceeds. On December 12, 2017, the Chapter 7 trustee filed two motions to approve compromise. The first motion, between the estate and the debtors and primarily relating to the amount of Debtors’ exemption in the proceeds, was granted on January 5, 2018. The second motion was set for hearing and is under consideration now.

Pursuant to the instant compromise motion the Trustee requests: (1) approval of the

11:00 AM

CONT...

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7

compromise of the products liability action; (2) authorization to employ Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP as co-special counsel and payment of their compensation; and (3) related relief, including approval of the settlement payment disbursements. No opposition to the instant compromise motion has been filed.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019(a) states: "On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct." The Court may grant approval if it determines that the compromise is "fair and equitable." See In re Berkeley Delaware Court, LLC, 834 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2016). In determining whether the compromise is fair and equitable, the Court applies a four-factor test. See In re DiCostanzo, 399 Fed. Appx. 307, 308 (9th Cir. 2010). The test was originally outlined in In re A & C Props., and provides for consideration of

(a) The probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it;

(d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.

784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986) (quotation omitted). "The bankruptcy court has great latitude in approving compromise agreements." In re Woodson, 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). Typically, "a compromise should be approved unless it falls below the lowest point in the range of reasonableness." In re Art & Architecture Books of the 21st Century, 2016 WL 1118742 at *25 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016) (quotation omitted).

The proposed settlement here, however, presents a unique situation. The proposed settlement represents an "aggregate settlement" negotiated in the context of, presumably, state or federal district court litigation. The proposed settlement has not been disclosed to the Court on the basis that it contains a confidentiality provision. Furthermore, Trustee motions lacks detail in its description of the situation. The nature, extent and value of Debtor’s claim are completely unknown to this Court. The

11:00 AM

CONT...

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7

factual situation giving rise to Debtor’s claim is unclear, and the Court lacks any ability to estimate the value of the claim. Furthermore, as a result of the absence of information, the Court lacks the information necessary to determine the reasonableness of the requested attorney’s fees.

The Bankruptcy Code demonstrates a preference for public access to the proceedings. See 11 U.S.C. § 107 (2010). There are procedures by which certain documents, including settlements, can be classified as confidential. See, e.g., In re Oldco M Corp., 466 B.R. 234 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012); In re Hemple, 295 B.R. 200 (Bankr. D. Vt.

2003). In order for the Court to apply the legal standards of 11 U.S.C. § 107, the Court must be given an opportunity to review the material and make a determination regarding whether the matter is entitled to confidentiality.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion or CONTINUE the matter for supplemental evidence and analysis.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Vega Represented By

Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Carolyn Vega Represented By Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18343

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 1 by Claimant Ally Financial Also #7

Docket 60

Tentative Ruling:

07/11/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 17, 2016 ("Petition Date"), Jose and Angela Olvera ("Debtors") filed for Chapter 13 relief. On October 7, 2016 Ally Financial ("Creditor") filed a proof of claim ("Claim #1") in the amount of $9,522.45, $8,125.00 of which was secured by Debtor’s 2011 Chevrolet HHR ("HHR"). On October 10, 2016, Creditor filed a second secured proof of claim ("Claim #2) in the amount of $9,846.95,

$9,325.00 of which was secured by Debtor’s Chevrolet Impala ("Impala").

On March 2, 2017, Creditor was granted relief from the automatic stay and shortly thereafter repossessed the HHR and Impala. On or about March 8, 2017, Debtors filed a Notice of Conversion to Chapter 7 and this Court granted said conversion. On April 13, 2017, the Trustee filed a Notice of Assets and set a proof of claim deadline in the Chapter 7 Case for July 17, 2017. Creditor then filed their Amended Proof of Claims on January 18, 2018 – 6 months beyond the proof of claim deadline set in the Chapter 7 case and 9 months after repossession. These amended claims allege a now unsecured amount of $10,313.04 for the HHR and $10,478.23 for the Impala.

On May 16, 2017, the Debtors filed objections to both Claims #1 and #2 ("Objection #1 and Objection #2").

PERTINENT LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502, a claim of interest is deemed allowed unless a

Chapter 7

party in interest objects. Therefore, a proof of claim shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of claim if executed and filed in accordance with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). The filing of an objection to a proof of claim creates a dispute which is a contested matter within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and must be resolved after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Lundell v. Anchor Const. Specialists, Inc. 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000).

The party objecting to the claim has the burden of going forward and of introducing evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption of validity. Little Loan Servicing, LP v. Garvida (In Re Gardiva), 347 B.R. 697, 706-07 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006). Such evidence must be sufficient to demonstrate a true dispute and must have probative force equal to the contents of the claim. Lundell, F.3d at 1039.

FRBP 3002(c) states in relevant part that in a voluntary chapter 7 case "a proof of claim is timely filed if it is filed not later than 90 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors called under 341(a)." Rule 3002(c) then sets forth five enumerated exceptions to the 90 day general rule. Under section 502(b)(9), a claim will not be allowed when the proof of claim is not timely filed, "except to the extent tardily filed as permitted under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 726(a) under the Federal rules of Bankruptcy Procedure."

ANALYSIS:

Under the scope of authority set forth in section 704(5) of the Code, Debtors objected to Creditor’s proof of claim. Therefore, under § 502(a) the proof of claim is not initially allowed.

Debtors object to both Creditor’s Amended Proof of Claim #1 and Claim #2 on the basis that they were filed more than 6 months after the proof of claim deadline. Under 3002(c) of the FRBP, a proof of claim is timely filed for a voluntary Chapter 7 case if it is filed not later than 90 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors called under 341(a).

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

While none of Rule 3002(c)’s enumerated exceptions to this general ninety-

Chapter 7

day window apply, under 3002, as long as debtor has fair notice of the basis of the amended claim, creditor’s amended claim arose from the same transaction or occurrence as the timely-filed secured claim, and no prejudice will result to other parties in interest by allowing creditor to amend its secured claim, this Court is free to exercise its discretion in allowing the amendment of Claims #1 and #2.

Debtors further object to Creditor’s claims on the basis that the claims’ respective increases from $9,522.45 to $10,313 (Claim #1, the HHR) and $9,846.75 to

$10,478.23 (Claim #2, the Impala) are simply illogical. In assuming a sale at auction took place post-repossession of the vehicles, Debtors assert there are no logical grounds for an increase rather than a decrease in the claim amount ("Did Respondent sell the vehicle for a negative amount?")

Though it is far from clear that an auction in fact took place concerning either vehicle, Creditor provides little evidence substantiating its Amended Proof of Claims. The Amended Proof of Claims do not explain whether an auction took place, or how the claims simultaneously increased while become unsecured when during the earlies stages of the case, Creditor moved to repossess collateral of significant value.

Further, while the listed additional fees or expenses might conceivably explain the $9,522.45 to $10,478.23 (Claim #1) or $9,846.75 to $10,478.23 (Claim #2) increase between original and amended claims, none of the listed value amounts on either of Creditor’s Proof of Claim forms correlate with the gap. These actual discrepancies in amount and corresponding objections are almost certainly enough to demonstrate a "true dispute" under Lindell F.3d at 1039. Moreover, given that the Debtors do not have access to the information necessary to explain the situation, and Creditor has failed to address the situation through its proof of claim or by opposition to the instant motion, the Court will deems Creditor’s failure to oppose to be consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h). Id.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection to Claim 1.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Chapter 7

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Sebastian Olvera Jr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Angela Joanne Olvera Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Jose Sebastian Olvera Jr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Angela Joanne Olvera Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18343

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant Ally Financial Also #6

Docket 61

Tentative Ruling:

07/11/2018

BACKGROUND

$9,325.00 of which was secured by Debtor’s Chevrolet Impala ("Impala").

On May 16, 2017, the Debtors filed objections to both Claims #1 and #2 ("Objection #1 and Objection #2").

PERTINENT LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502, a claim of interest is deemed allowed unless a

Chapter 7

ANALYSIS:

Under the scope of authority set forth in section 704(5) of the Code, Debtors objected to Creditor’s proof of claim. Therefore, under § 502(a) the proof of claim is not initially allowed.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

While none of Rule 3002(c)’s enumerated exceptions to this general ninety-

Chapter 7

Debtors further object to Creditor’s claims on the basis that the claims’ respective increases from $9,522.45 to $10,313 (Claim #1, the HHR) and $9,846.75 to

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection to Claim 2.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera

Chapter 7

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Sebastian Olvera Jr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Angela Joanne Olvera Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Jose Sebastian Olvera Jr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Angela Joanne Olvera Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-10720

Hiep Huu Phan

Chapter 7 #8.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 70

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL FILED 6/12/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Hiep Huu Phan Represented By Toby T Tran

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

11:00 AM

6:17-12274

Denny L Rinehart

Chapter 7 #9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 63

Tentative Ruling:

7/11/18

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 4,260.01 Trustee Expenses: $ 231.35

Attorney Fees: $ 14,668.00 Attorney Costs: $ 356.04

Accountant Fees: $1,870.50 Accountant Costs: $254.60

Bond Payment: $17.87

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Denny L Rinehart

Chapter 7

Denny L Rinehart Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Rika Kido

11:00 AM

6:18-10208

Rolando Carlos Reyes and Florencia Aquino Reyes

Chapter 7 #10.00 Application to Employ Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP as General Counsel EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

7/11/18

BACKGROUND

On January 11, 2018, Rolando & Florencia Reyes ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On April 23, 2018, Debtors received a discharge.

On May 15, 2018, Trustee filed an adversary complaint for avoidance of fraudulent transfers, disallowance of claims, unjust enrichment, declaratory relief, and turnover of property against Reginald Reyes, Debtors’ son. On May 16, 2018, Trustee filed an application to employ Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP as general counsel for the estate. On May 30, 2018, Debtors filed an opposition to the application, arguing that such employment was premature and not in the best interests of the estate because there were no assets in the estate.

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 327(a) states:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rolando Carlos Reyes and Florencia Aquino Reyes

Except as otherwise provided in this section, the trustee, with the court’s approval, may employ one or more attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, or other professional persons, that do not hold or represent an

Chapter 7

interest adverse to the estate, and that are disinterested persons, to represent or assist the trustee in carrying out the trustee’s duties under this title.

Regarding the standard for the employment of professional persons, one court has stated:

The trustee, subject to the court’s approval, has broad discretion in his selection of counsel and the terms of employment. There are, however, two threshold requirements that the trustee must satisfy. First, the trustee must demonstrate that the attorney proposed to be employed meets certain statutory standards. Second, the employment must be reasonably necessary.

In re Computer Learning Ctrs., Inc., 272 B.R. 897, 903 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2001) (citations omitted).

Regarding whether the proposed employment is reasonable and necessary, one court has stated:

Thus, once the trustee meets the burden of demonstrating that an applicant for professional employment is qualified under § 327, the discretion of the bankruptcy court must be exercised in a way that it believes best serves the objectives of the bankruptcy system. Among the ultimate considerations for the bankruptcy courts in making these decisions must be the protection of the interests of the bankruptcy estate and its creditors, and the efficient, expeditious, and economical resolution of the bankruptcy proceeding.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rolando Carlos Reyes and Florencia Aquino Reyes

Chapter 7

In re Harold & Williams Dev. Co., 977 F.2d 906, 910 (4th Cir. 1992).

Here, Debtors’ opposition appears to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how a bankruptcy case is administered. Generally speaking it is the role of a trustee to administer assets. When a trustee needs to bring legal claims or file non-routine motions, an attorney, with the requisite legal skill to assist the Trustee, may be necessary. Whether there are assets in the estate is irrelevant; the guiding question is, however, whether the trustee requires legal assistance to perform his responsibilities. Here, where Trustee has brought an adversary proceeding, it is clear that legal assistance is reasonably necessary.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court will GRANT the application.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rolando Carlos Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Joint Debtor(s):

Florencia Aquino Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rolando Carlos Reyes and Florencia Aquino Reyes

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander

11:00 AM

6:18-10971

Ryan James Masalcas

Chapter 7 #11.00 Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 Between Chapter 7 Trustee and Ryan James Masalcas

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ryan James Masalcas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11717

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7 #12.00 United States Trustee's Notice of Motion and Motion To Extend The Discharge Deadline

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:

7/11/18

BACKGROUND

On March 5, 2018, Jordan Amini ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On June 7, 2018, UST filed a motion for an extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge. UST asserts that Debtor previously operated a used car sales lot, and UST implies that business inventory may have been recently transferred to Debtor’s father business without being disclosed in the case commencement documents.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(a) states:

In a chapter 7 case, a complaint, or a motion under § 727(a)(8) or (9) of the Code, objecting to the debtor’s discharge shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). In a chapter 11 case, the complaint shall be filed no later than the first date set

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7

for the hearing on confirmation. In a chapter 13 case, a motion objecting to the debtor’s discharge under § 1328(f) shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). At least 28 days’ notice of the time so fixed shall be given to the United States trustee and all creditors as provided in Rule 2002(f) and (k) and to the trustee and the trustee’s attorney.

And FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(b) states:

On motion of any party in interest, after notice and hearing, the court may for cause extend the time to object to discharge. Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2), the motion shall be filed before the time has expired.
A motion to extent the time to object to discharge may be filed after the time for objection has expired and before discharge is granted if (A) the objection is based on facts that, if learned after the discharge, would provide a basis for revocation under § 727(d) of the Code, and (B) the movant did not have knowledge of those facts in time to permit an objection. The motion shall be filed promptly after the movant discovers the facts on which the objection is based.

Here, the delay in providing information adequate to assess the financial circumstances of Debtor constitutes sufficient cause to extend the deadline. See COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 4004.03[2] (16th ed. 2013) ("A debtor’s delays in responding to discovery may be sufficient cause. Obviously, a delay in the meeting of creditors to a date close to or after the deadline may constitute such cause.") (citing In re McCormack, 244 B.R. 203 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2000)).

Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose may be deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).

TENTATIVE RULING
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and EXTEND the deadline to file an objection to discharge until August 10, 2018.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
Abram Feuerstein esq
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01199 Revere Financial Corporation v. Bank of Southern California, N.A.

#13.00 Status Conference RE: [60] Amended Complaint (Third) by Franklin R Fraley Jr on behalf of Revere Financial Corporation against Bank of Southern California, N.A.. (Fraley, Franklin)

EH

Docket 60

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Bank of Southern California, N.A. Represented By
Kathryn M.S. Catherwood
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:14-14377

Hilary D Hill

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01190 Speier v. U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Managem

#14.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01190. Complaint by Steven M Speier against U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management, Hilary D Hill. (Charge To Estate- $350.00). Complaint for Declaratory Relief re Alter Ego Liability of the Marion Newhall Hill Trust Nature of Suit: (71 (Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay))

From: 11/8/17, 2/14/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 6/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Hilary D Hill Represented By
Matthew D Resnik David Brian Lally
Defendant(s):
U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Represented By
Benjamin Nachimson
Hilary D Hill Represented By
David Brian Lally
Plaintiff(s):
Steven M Speier Represented By Robert P Goe Donald Reid
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Hilary D Hill

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Elizabeth A LaRocque
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01102 PRINGLE v. Capital One Bank (USA), National Association

#15.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01102. Complaint by JOHN PRINGLE against Capital One Bank (USA), National Association. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05; (2) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B); (3) Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; and (4) Disallowance of Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502 Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Goe, Robert)

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED - STATUS CONFERENCE SET 9/5/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
Defendant(s):
Capital One Bank (USA), National Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
JOHN PRINGLE Represented By Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman

Chapter 13

#16.00 CONT Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11 by Claimant Natasha Reynoso and Mark Reynoso
HOLDING DATE

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18

EH

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
Joint Debtor(s):
Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
Movant(s):
Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman

Chapter 13
2:00 PM
6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#17.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [26] Crossclaim by Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman against all defendants

From: 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18

Also #18 EH
Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
Defendant(s):
Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
Jose Pastora Represented By
Andrew L Leff
Joint Debtor(s):
Anne Louise Goodman Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Chapter 13
Plaintiff(s):
Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#18.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [13] Amended Complaint by Michael J Hemming on behalf of Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:16-ap-01277. Complaint by Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Douglas Edward Goodman, Anne Louise Goodman. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) filed by Plaintiff Mark & Natasha Reynoso)
(Holding Date)

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18

Also #17 EH
Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Defendant(s):
  Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber
  Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas Edward Goodman
  
  Chapter 13
  Jose Pastora Represented By
  Andrew L Leff
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber
  Plaintiff(s):
  Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-10032
  
  Richard Earl Davis, Jr
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:17-01066 Gumbs et al v. Davis, Jr et al
  
  #19.00 CONT Motion for Default Judgment against Richard Earl Davis Jr.
  
  From: 1/10/18, 6/6/18 Also #20
  EH
  
  Docket 19
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  07/11/2018
  
  On October 8, 2015, Angelo Gumbs ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint in the Superior Court of Los Angeles against the debtor, Richard Earl Davis, Jr. ("Debtor" or "Defendant") asserting claims for Fraud – Intentional Misrepresentation, Fraud – Concealment, and Fraud – Promise Without Intent to Perform (the "State Action").
  
  On April 14, 2016, the Debtor filed his petition for chapter 7 relief.
  Subsequently, the State Action was stayed pending proceedings in the bankruptcy court. On March 30, 2017, the Plaintiff filed his Complaint to determine dischargeability pursuant to § 523(a)(2) ("Complaint"). On December 7, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default Judgment ("Motion") against the Debtor.
  However, on the date of the hearing on the Motion, the Debtor filed an Answer and the Motion was continued to provide Plaintiff an opportunity to supplement the Motion and/or to provide an opportunity for Plaintiff to move to strike the Answer. On May 9, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Strike the Answer and for Entry of Default ("Strike Motion"). At the hearing on May 30, 2018, the Court granted the Strike Motion, striking the answer and ordering entry of default.
  
  At the continued June 6, 2018, hearing, the Court required that the Plaintiff (1) lodge the order on the Motion to Strike; (2) file the requested State Court documents;
file points and authorities; and (4) provide notice of the continuance of the hearing
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7
on the Motion for Default Judgment and Status Conference, and of the Court’s new deadlines. The Plaintiff has complied with the Court’s requirements. The Court now turns to the merits of the Motion.

The Motion is supported by the Affidavit of Kandis Gumbs, the Plaintiff’s wife, and by the Declaration of the Plaintiff’s counsel along with exhibits attached to, and authenticated by the Plaintiff’s Wife and Counsel. The Court admits all of the evidence submitted. Additionally, the Court deems as admitted the statements included in the Plaintiff’s "Requests for Admission, Set One" to which Plaintiff received no responses by Debtor after his filing of an Answer. (Holdren Decl. at Ex. C)

DISCUSSION
1. Entry of Default
  
  Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Per LBR 7055-1(b)(1), a motion for entry of default judgment shall contain the following:
  1. When and against what party default was entered 
  2. Whether defaulting party is an infant or incompetent person –  (N/A)
  3. Whether the defaulting party is currently on active duty –  (N/A)
  4. Whether notice has been served on defaulting party, if required by FRCP 55(b)(2) 
    
    As to the entry of default, the Court has granted the Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike and has directed the clerk of Court to enter default against the Defendant.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Richard Earl Davis, Jr
    
    Chapter 7
2. Admissions
  
  Pursuant to FRBP 7008(b)(6), failure to deny an allegation of the Complaint where a responsive pleading is required constitutes an admission of the allegation.
3. Default Judgment
  
  Factors which may be considered by courts in exercising discretion as to the entry of a default judgment include: (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff; (2) the merits of plaintiff’s substantive claim; (3) the sufficiency of the complaint; (4) the sum of money at stake in the action; (5) the possibility of a dispute considering material facts; (6) whether the default was due to excusable neglect; and (7) the strong policy underlying the FRCP favoring decision on the merits. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986).
  1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
    
    As detailed above, the Defendant late-filed an Answer to the Complaint but later failed to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery requests or to his requests to meet and confer. For these reasons, the Answer was struck. Additionally, the Motion was properly served on Debtor and he has failed to file opposition or response. Plaintiff has fulfilled his obligations regarding due process.
  2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
    
    Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); "The defendant, by his default, admits the plaintiff's well-pleaded allegations of facts, is concluded on those facts by the judgment, and is barred from contesting on appeal the facts thus established." Nishimatsu Construction Co., Ltd. v. Houston Nat'l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200, 1206 (5th Cir. 1975) (emphasis added); Danning v. Lavine, 572 F.2d 1386, 1388 (9th Cir.
    1978); Cotton v. Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co., 402 F.3d 1267, 1278(11th Cir.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Richard Earl Davis, Jr
    
    Chapter 7
    2005) (do not have to take as true facts that are not well-pleaded or conclusions of law).
    
    As a threshold matter, the Court finding that the factual allegations of the State Action are identical to the facts alleged in the Complaint, considers whether the claims asserted in the State Action are nondischargeable as a matter of law, prior to examining whether the allegations suffice to require entry of judgment under § 523(a) (2).
    
    First, as to "Fraud -Intentional Misrepresentation", Ninth Circuit case law confirms that the elements of fraud under California law match the ones under § 523(a)(2)(A). Younie v. Gonya (In re Younie), 211 B.R. 367, 373–74 (9th Cir. BAP 1997) ("The elements of § 523(a)(2)(A) ‘mirror the elements of common law fraud’ and match those for actual fraud under California law."). See also Baldwin v.
    Kilpatrick (In re Baldwin), 245 B.R. 131, 134 (9th Cir. BAP 2000). Second, as to "Concealment", it is "well recognized that silence, or the concealment of a material fact, can be the basis of a false impression which creates a misrepresentation actionable under § 523(a)(2)(A)." In re Evans, 181 B.R. 508, 514-515 (Bankr.S.D.Cal.1995); see In re Daquila, 2011 WL 3300197 (9th Cir. BAP Feb. 28, 2011) ("A debtor's failure to disclose material facts constitutes a fraudulent omission under § 523(a)(2)(A) if the debtor was under a duty to disclose and possessed an intent to deceive."); In re Miller, 310 B.R. 185, 196 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2004) ("The concealment or omission of material facts that a party has a duty to disclose can support the nondischargeability of a debt on the grounds of actual fraud."). In re Davis, 486 B.R. 182, 191 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2013), decision supplemented, No.
    10-74245 MEH, 2013 WL 2304684 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. May 24, 2013).
    
    Finally, as to "Fraud – Concealment, and Fraud – Promise Without Intent to Perform", Promissory fraud is a subspecies of the action for fraud and deceit. Downey Venture v. LMI Ins. Co., 66 Cal.App.4th 478, 510, 78 Cal.Rptr.2d 142, 161 (1998).
    Under California law, the elements of promissory fraud are identical to the elements of common law fraud, when the misrepresentation at issue is a promise made without intent to perform. In re Tobin, 258 B.R. 199, 203 (9th Cir. BAP 2001) (internal
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Richard Earl Davis, Jr
    
    Chapter 7
    citations omitted). Thus, under any of the theories advanced by Plaintiff in the State Action, a finding of liability would also be sufficient to establish nondischargeability pursuant to § 523(a)(2).
    
    Fraud pursuant to §523(a)(2)
    In order to maintain a claim for actual fraud pursuant to § 523(a)(2), the plaintiff must provide sufficient factual content from which a court can derive that:
    1. the debtor made the representations; (2) that at the time he knew they were false; (3) that he made them with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (4) that the creditor relied on such representations, and (5) that the creditor sustained the alleged loss and damage as the proximate result of the representations having been made.
      In re Taylor, 514 F.2d 1370, 1373 (9th Cir.1975).
      
      The Declaration of Kandis Gumbs adequately details that the Debtor made the following misrepresentations, in addition to other misrepresentations not detailed here:
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Richard Earl Davis, Jr
      nights and did not repay the loan (Id. ¶12);
      - Debtor misrepresented that he loaned $10,000 to Plaintiff and sought reimbursement which the Plaintiff and his wife paid but in reality the $10,000 had never been deposited and Debtor never returned the funds;
      - Debtor agreed to purchase a 2011 Camaro from the Plaintiff and to make payments on the vehicle but instead of making the payments, instead sold the vehicle and purchased a new vehicle (Id. ¶15);
        
        Chapter 7
        Debtor invoiced Plaintiff $11,015 for an alleged loan, which Plaintiff and wife paid to Debtor on February 26, 2012. However, the Debtors reviewed their accounts and found that there had been no loan as asserted by Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 21);
        Debtor proposed an investment deal with a third party which Plaintiff and wife later discovered was a scam. The Plaintiff and wife were induced to invest
      $45,151 for the "investment". (Id. ¶22).
      
      Based on the nature of the misrepresentations outlined above and in the Affidavit of Kandis Gumbs, and the statements deemed admitted by the Debtor for failing to respond to the Plaintiff’s interrogatories, the Court finds that Debtor knew his statements to the Plaintiff and his wife regarding services he was performing, loans he allegedly made, investments he allegedly set up, and goods he allegedly purchased for the Plaintiff, were false and that the Debtor knew the statements and representations were false when made. Further the Affidavit supports a finding that the Plaintiff and his wife relied on the Debtor’s misrepresentations when they paid Debtor monies for the various goods, services and investments they believed would yield them value, and finally, that as outlined in the Gumbs Declaration and attached Exhibits, the Plaintiff and his wife have provided evidence that they sustained damages as a proximate result of the Plaintiff’s misrepresentations in the amount of approximately $150,000.
  3. The possibility of a dispute considering material facts
    
    Defendant was properly served with the summons and complaint. Defendant’s answer was struck by this Court. The Defendant failed to respond to either the Motion to Strike his Answer or to the instant Motion for a Default Judgment and has failed to appear at Status Conferences or to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery requests or requests
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Richard Earl Davis, Jr
    
    Chapter 7
    to meet and confer. Therefore, no dispute of material facts precludes entry of default judgment.
  4. Whether the default was due to excusable neglect
    
    Defendant had the opportunity to file opposition to the instant Motion and failed to do so. There has been no indication that any excuse exists for the Defendant’s nonresponsiveness. Thus, the Court finds that the default was not due to excusable neglect and may be granted.
  5. The strong policy underlying the FRCP favoring decision on the merits Although default judgments are ordinarily disfavored, termination of a case

before hearing the merits is allowed when a defendant fails to defend an action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55. Here, it appears that Defendant has abandoned his defense against the claims of Plaintiff. However, the Court, having required and received evidence to support the claims, finds that the merits have been adequately supported and that entry of a default judgment as to nondischargeability is warranted. Thus, the instant judgment represents a decision on the merits.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Motion is GRANTED. The Court is inclined to enter a judgment of nondischargeability as to the claims asserted in the State Action, which represent a debt of approximately $150,000.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7

Two6 Sports Management Pro Se

Movant(s):

Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris Kenneth A Holdren

Plaintiff(s):

Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris Kenneth A Holdren

Kandis Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-10032

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01066 Gumbs et al v. Davis, Jr et al

#20.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01066. Complaint by Angelo M Gumbs , Kandis Gumbs against Richard Earl Davis Jr, Two6 Sports Management . false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud))

From: 8/30/17, 11/1/17, 1/10/18, 6/6/18 Also #19

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

06/06/18

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Status Conference continued to July 11, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. See matter No. 10.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Earl Davis Jr Represented By Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Richard Earl Davis Jr Pro Se

Two6 Sports Management Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Angelo M Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris Kenneth A Holdren

Kandis Gumbs Represented By Alexander B Boris

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Richard Earl Davis, Jr

Chapter 7

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-12748

William A. Mendez, II

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01129 Hadra et al v. Mendez et al

#21.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Andrew C. Hadra against William A. Mendez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

From: 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 4/11/18, 6/6/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: JUDGMENT ENTERED 6/7/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis

Defendant(s):

William A. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis

Shawna D Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis

Joint Debtor(s):

Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis

Plaintiff(s):

Andrew C. Hadra Represented By Peter W Lianides Alan Droste

2:00 PM

CONT...

William A. Mendez, II

Chapter 7

Vertical Partners LLC Represented By Peter W Lianides Alan Droste

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#22.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Also #23

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#23.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)

(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Mina Farah against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18 Also #22

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Wayne W Suojanen

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#24.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Also #25

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#25.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)

(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18 Also #24

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Wayne W Suojanen

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#26.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury

From: 5/9/18, 5/16/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mona Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Rafet Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich

2:00 PM

6:18-15026

Joe R Garcia

Chapter 13 #27.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 15420 Bello Way, Moreno Valley, CA 92555

MOVANT: JOE R GARCIA

From: 7/10/18 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe R Garcia Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

Joe R Garcia Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Joe R Garcia

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-15020

Miriam Torres

Chapter 13 #28.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate ALL PERSONAL AND REAL PROPERTY

MOVANT: MIRIAM TORRES

From: 7/10/18 EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

7/10/2018

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#1.00 Motion For Summary Judgment/Memorandum of Points and Authorities on the Preclusive Effect of Plaintiff's State Court Judgment

Also #2 EH

Docket 208

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi

Defendant(s):

Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas

Plaintiff(s):

Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:13-16964

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:13-ap-01171. Complaint by Charles Edward Schrader against Narinder Sangha . willful and malicious injury HOLDING DATE

From: 7/8/15, 11/4/15, 3/2/16, 12/14/16, 12/13/17, 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 7/12/17, 8/2/17, 9/27/17, 10/4/17, 11/1/17, 12/6/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 6/20/18

Also #1 EH

Docket 1

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi

Defendant(s):

Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas

Plaintiff(s):

Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11450

David Paul Bitzer

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01107 Bitzer v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC et al

#1.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01107. Complaint by David Paul Bitzer against OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, DEUTSCHE BANK

NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY. (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Coburn, H)

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/13/18

Party Information

David Paul Bitzer Represented By

H Christopher Coburn

Defendant(s):

Docket 24

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/7/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adrian Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12992

Charles Henry Sacayan and Catherine Angela McNicholas

Chapter 13 #8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18, 6/28/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Henry Sacayan Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Joint Debtor(s):

Catherine Angela McNicholas Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13163

Michael D Hayden, II and Joanna Queen Hayden

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael D Hayden II Represented By Sunita N Sood

Joint Debtor(s):

Joanna Queen Hayden Represented By Sunita N Sood

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13193

Richard Garavito

Chapter 13 #10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18, 6/28/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Michael Avanesian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13208

Robert Justice Morse, Jr. and Helen Julia Morse

Chapter 13 #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Justice Morse Jr. Represented By Robert W Ripley

Joint Debtor(s):

Helen Julia Morse Represented By Robert W Ripley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13268

Oscar Franco and Edubijes Franco

Chapter 13 #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18, 6/28/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Oscar Franco Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Edubijes Franco Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13566

Marco Tulio Magana and Gloria Louisa Magana

Chapter 13 #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Marco Tulio Magana Represented By Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Gloria Louisa Magana Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13678

Kevin Eugene Martin and Francisca Chavez-Martin

Chapter 13 #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18

Docket 0

Chapter 13 #18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/8/18

Party Information

Jose F Mejia Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14277

Cesar Orozco

Chapter 13 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cesar Orozco Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14278

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Bruce Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Tina Marie Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14315

John Ryan

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/11/18

Party Information

John Ryan Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14336

Peter Najim

Chapter 13 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Peter Najim Represented By

Ivan Trahan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14337

Jose Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13 #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Velasco Represented By

Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14340

Lawrence A McCoy

Chapter 13 #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lawrence A McCoy Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14377

Elizabeth L Taufaao

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Elizabeth L Taufaao Represented By

Benjamin A Yrungaray

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14388

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Pabloff Represented By

Tom A Moore

Joint Debtor(s):

Virginia Pabloff Represented By Tom A Moore

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14394

Xavier Cristobal Luna

Chapter 13 #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Xavier Cristobal Luna Represented By Roberto Gil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14402

Bessie Johnson Desroches

Chapter 13 #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/11/18

Party Information

Bessie Johnson Desroches Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14409

Ralph O Dieter

Chapter 13 #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ralph O Dieter Represented By Stephen R Wade

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14412

Roberto Hernandez and Christina M Hernandez

Chapter 13 #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roberto Hernandez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Christina M Hernandez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14467

Jose M. Cortez

Chapter 13 #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose M. Cortez Represented By Patricia A Mireles

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14468

Patricia Solis-Alvarez

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Patricia Solis-Alvarez Represented By

Raj T Wadhwani

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-23388

Jose N Recinos and Patricia Recinos

Chapter 13 #37.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 6/28/18

Docket 277

Chapter 13 #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 46

Party Information

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/13/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Vasquez Hernandez Represented By Manfred Schroer

Joint Debtor(s):

Ana Maria Hernandez Represented By Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:12-35447

Fernando Rodriguez and Gabriela Rodriguez

Chapter 13 #2.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 277

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Araceli Canela Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-12545

Pyongil Cha

Chapter 13 #6.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 135

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pyongil Cha Represented By

Parisa Fishback David Brian Lally Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-13035

Kevin Ray Miller and Martina Miller

Chapter 13 #7.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 81

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kevin Ray Miller Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Martina Miller Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-13337

Corey J. McKeever and Lucy C. McKeever

Chapter 13 #8.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 171

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Corey J. McKeever Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucy C. McKeever Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-13554

Philip J. Adams and Kathy M. Adams

Chapter 13 #9.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Philip J. Adams Represented By

Anthony G Lagomarsino

Joint Debtor(s):

Kathy M. Adams Represented By

Anthony G Lagomarsino

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-13746

Ronald Andrew Lopez and Lisa Darlene Lopez

Chapter 13 #10.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 183

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ronald Andrew Lopez Represented By David Lozano

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Darlene Lopez Represented By David Lozano

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-15321

John Douglas Bacon and Monica Marie Bacon

Chapter 13 #11.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 61

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/7/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Douglas Bacon Represented By Andrew Moher

Joint Debtor(s):

Monica Marie Bacon Represented By Andrew Moher

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-15700

Brian Bulos Khoury and Christine Khoury

Chapter 13 #12.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 96

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brian Bulos Khoury Represented By Marc A Duxbury

Joint Debtor(s):

Christine Khoury Represented By Marc A Duxbury

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-17149

Desmond Anthony Townsend and Lillian Carmen

Chapter 13 #13.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Desmond Anthony Townsend Represented By April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Lillian Carmen Townsend Represented By April E Roberts

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-17200

Robert J. Holcomb and Senorina Rivera Holcomb

Chapter 13 #14.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 49

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert J. Holcomb Represented By Joseph A Weber Fritz J Firman

Joint Debtor(s):

Senorina Rivera Holcomb Represented By Joseph A Weber Fritz J Firman

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-18728

Jeanette Johnson

Chapter 13 #15.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 72

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jeanette Johnson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-18779

Rigoberto Baez

Chapter 13 #16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 153

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/17/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rigoberto Baez Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-19151

Jesus Garcia and Olivia Garcia

Chapter 13 #17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 73

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Garcia Represented By

Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Olivia Garcia Represented By

Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-19250

Robert B Eppley

Chapter 13 #18.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 91

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert B Eppley Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-21440

John McCabe and Elena McCabe

Chapter 13 #19.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John McCabe Represented By Kirk A Laron

Joint Debtor(s):

Elena McCabe Represented By Kirk A Laron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-21894

Francisco Javier Medina and Maria Guadalupe Medina

Chapter 13 #20.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 175

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Francisco Javier Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Guadalupe Medina Represented By Tamar Terzian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-22605

Rebecca Lee Shaffer

Chapter 13 #21.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 75

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/13/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rebecca Lee Shaffer Represented By Todd B Becker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-24456

Lenore Esther Hernandez and Jesus Anthony Hernandez

Chapter 13 #22.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Anthony Hernandez Represented By Erik Clark Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Lenore Esther Hernandez Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-25336

Enrique Artemio Barba

Chapter 13 #23.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 173

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Enrique Artemio Barba Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-25621

Gildardo R Herrera and Stephanie D Herrera

Chapter 13 #24.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 104

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gildardo R Herrera Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Stephanie D Herrera Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-26237

Carlos Vincent Valdez and Grace G. Valdez

Chapter 13 #25.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 69

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carlos Vincent Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Joint Debtor(s):

Grace G. Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-28068

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-30567

Robert Warren Gillam and Diana Lynn Gillam

Chapter 13 #37.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 84

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Warren Gillam Represented By James P Doan

Joint Debtor(s):

Diana Lynn Gillam Represented By James P Doan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:13-30641

Jacob J Cannon and Danielle M Cannon

Chapter 13 #38.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 133

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jacob J Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Danielle M Cannon Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-10402

Gary Lee Edwards and Rose Marie Edwards

Chapter 13 #39.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 71

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Lee Edwards Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Joint Debtor(s):

Rose Marie Edwards Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-10632

Angel K. Horn

Chapter 13 #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 44

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Angel K. Horn Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-10793

Robert Anthony Maruffo and Allison Marie Maruffo

Chapter 13 #41.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 74

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Anthony Maruffo Represented By Carey C Pickford

Joint Debtor(s):

Allison Marie Maruffo Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-10795

Agnes Smith

Chapter 13 #42.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 103

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Agnes Smith Represented By

James T Lillard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-10944

Danah Merrie Collier

Chapter 13 #43.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 77

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Danah Merrie Collier Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-11281

Geofrey J Kitilya

Chapter 13 #44.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Geofrey J Kitilya Represented By Tina H Trinh

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-11369

Robert Wayne Cook, Sr. and Kelly Danielle Cook

Chapter 13 #45.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 148

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Wayne Cook Sr. Represented By Steven A Alpert

Joint Debtor(s):

Kelly Danielle Cook Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-11597

Taylor J. Bretz

Chapter 13 #46.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 206

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Taylor J. Bretz Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-11816

Arnel De Castro and Anna De Castro

Chapter 13 #47.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 80

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maricella Garcia Represented By Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-13510

Carmen Lucya Mendez

Chapter 13 #51.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 97

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carmen Lucya Mendez Represented By Sara E Razavi

Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-13555

George Henry Samuelsen

Chapter 13 #52.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/13/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

George Henry Samuelsen Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-13829

Alexis Justine Brooks

Chapter 13 #53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alexis Justine Brooks Represented By Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-14265

Ricardo Pimentel and Maria Pimentel

Chapter 13 #54.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 78

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/6/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ricardo Pimentel Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Pimentel Represented By Tamar Terzian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-14384

William J English

Chapter 13 #55.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William J English Represented By Eric C Morris

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-15246

David J Macias and Martha Macias

Chapter 13 #56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 71

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David J Macias Represented By Marjorie M Johnson

Joint Debtor(s):

Martha Macias Represented By Marjorie M Johnson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-15520

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis

Chapter 13 #57.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-15845

Alex Soto

Chapter 13 #58.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 95

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-17490

Kenneth Mcewing Huff

Chapter 13 #62.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kenneth Mcewing Huff Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-17491

Rosalie Estella Crouch

Chapter 13 #63.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 91

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rosalie Estella Crouch Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-17529

Troy Gene Thomas and Becky L Thomas

Chapter 13 #64.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 113

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Troy Gene Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Becky L Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-18156

Jose Luis Gutierrez and Patricia Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #65.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Luis Gutierrez Represented By Kelly Warren

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Gutierrez Represented By Kelly Warren

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-18349

Fabiola Adame

Chapter 13 #66.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 169

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fabiola Adame Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-18359

Donnie Edward Southerland and Andrea Marie

Chapter 13 #67.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 115

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Donnie Edward Southerland Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Andrea Marie Southerland Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-18523

Dennis Williams

Chapter 13 #68.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 93

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/7/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Dennis Williams Represented By Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-19029

Sheila Marie Dejesa

Chapter 13 #69.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 78

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sheila Marie Dejesa Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-19319

Edward Jennings Kidwell

Chapter 13 #70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 96

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edward Jennings Kidwell Represented By Tyson Takeuchi Scott Kosner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-19428

Reynaldo Jaimes Merlan and Maria D Merlan

Chapter 13 #71.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 61

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Reynaldo Jaimes Merlan Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria D Merlan Represented By Tamar Terzian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-19913

Martin Caballero and Clementina Caballero

Chapter 13 #72.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 122

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Martin Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Clementina Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-20166

Rosa Partida

Chapter 13 #73.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 121

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rosa Partida Represented By

Mathew Alden

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-20307

Anna M Loconto

Chapter 13 #74.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 62

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/6/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anna M Loconto Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-20348

Frederick Rudy Deveau and Wendy Jo Deveau

Chapter 13 #75.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 76

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frederick Rudy Deveau Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Wendy Jo Deveau Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-20798

John W Ambrose, Jr

Chapter 13 #76.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John W Ambrose Jr Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-20832

Ryan Scott Williams

Chapter 13 #77.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 48

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FLD 7/3/18

Party Information

Ryan Scott Williams Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-21370

Imelda Tapia

Chapter 13 #78.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 77

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/20/18

Party Information

Imelda Tapia Represented By

Anthony Wilaras

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-21377

Adam Max Thewes and Kristine Ann Thewes

Chapter 13 #79.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 70

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adam Max Thewes Represented By Steven A Alpert

Joint Debtor(s):

Kristine Ann Thewes Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-21455

Raul Ruelas and Laura Ruelas

Chapter 13 #80.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Raul Ruelas Represented By

Patricia M Ashcraft

Joint Debtor(s):

Laura Ruelas Represented By

Patricia M Ashcraft

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-22149

Ruben Sotelo

Chapter 13 #81.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 77

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Chapter 13 #88.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 50

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Padilla Simental Represented By Bryn C Deb

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-25156

Keith Raynard Burton and Brigette Michelle Burton

Chapter 13 #93.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 139

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Keith Raynard Burton Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Brigette Michelle Burton Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:14-25452

Gary Dewain Pounds and Mary Margaret Pounds

Chapter 13 #94.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Dewain Pounds Represented By Michael Jay Berger

Joint Debtor(s):

Mary Margaret Pounds Represented By Michael Jay Berger

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-10237

Maria E Carranza

Chapter 13 #95.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maria E Carranza Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-10334

Alberto H. Garcia and Gina Caceres

Chapter 13 #96.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Docket 157

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher John Helme Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-11020

Joseph Levi Riddle and Jessica Sue Riddle

Chapter 13 #100.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 91

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Levi Riddle Represented By

L. Tegan Rodkey

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gabriel Eduardo Dominguez Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Martha Ruth Dominguez Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-11540

Jesus Manuel Gomez and Maria Gomez

Chapter 13 #105.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 104

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Manuel Gomez Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Gomez Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-12092

Edilberto Aguirre-Mendoza and Alba Zacarias-Cebrero

Chapter 13 #106.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edilberto Aguirre-Mendoza Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Joint Debtor(s):

Alba Zacarias-Cebrero Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-12168

Leslie A. Larson

Chapter 13 #107.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 81

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Leslie A. Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-12173

David L Aston and Evelyn A Aston

Chapter 13 #108.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 48

* VACATED * REASON: WITHRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Jose Ceja Jr Represented By

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-13643

Milton Y Diaz and Maria Alejandra Diaz

Chapter 13 #115.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Milton Y Diaz Represented By Thomas Watkins

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Alejandra Diaz Represented By Thomas Watkins

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-13652

David Wark and Michelle Wark

Chapter 13 #116.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Wark Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Michelle Wark Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-13811

Christopher Lee Sumners

Chapter 13 #117.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 81

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher Lee Sumners Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-13830

Ramon Urrutia

Chapter 13 #118.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 49

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-14835

Bennea Cynthia Travis

Chapter 13 #122.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 87

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Michael O'Cull Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-15750

John Luther Peterson

Chapter 13 #126.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 80

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Luther Peterson Represented By Robert J Spitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-15831

William R Parker and Cheryl Parker

Chapter 13 #127.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 95

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Allen J Sheerin Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-16079

Tracy Lynne Crooks

Chapter 13 #131.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 82

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Stephen Puddy Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-16637

Martin D Woods and Shante L Woods

Chapter 13 #135.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 89

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Martin D Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Shante L Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-16873

Brenda Morgan

Chapter 13 #136.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 67

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brenda Morgan Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-16972

Joe Martinez, Jr. and Sandra Lynette Martinez

Chapter 13 #137.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe Martinez Jr. Represented By David Lozano

Joint Debtor(s):

Sandra Lynette Martinez Represented By David Lozano

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17060

Chris Alvarado Espinoza

Chapter 13 #138.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 65

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chris Alvarado Espinoza Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17177

Shari Lynn Finch

Chapter 13 #139.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Shari Lynn Finch Represented By

D Justin Harelik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17349

Qurieno De Guchy, Sr. and Jessica Nerida De Guchy

Chapter 13 #140.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 104

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Qurieno De Guchy Sr. Represented By Gary S Saunders

Joint Debtor(s):

Jessica Nerida De Guchy Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17441

Angelica Teresa Anguiano

Chapter 13 #141.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 124

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Angelica Teresa Anguiano Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17476

Michael Brian Goodrich, Sr. and Kimberly JoAnn Carter

Chapter 13 #142.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 171

Docket 50

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David P. Carpenter Represented By Carey C Pickford

Joint Debtor(s):

Cresencia M. Carpenter Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-17743

Maria C. Ignacio

Chapter 13 #146.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 48

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe Roger Montes Represented By Stephen R Wade

W. Derek May

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-18139

Randall Meier

Chapter 13 #150.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 111

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Randall Meier Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-18175

Rudolph Mike Montoya and Rosemary Montoya

Chapter 13 #151.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rudolph Mike Montoya Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosemary Montoya Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-18702

Frank Munoz and Nanci Jessie Munoz

Chapter 13 #152.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Munoz Represented By

Alon Darvish

Joint Debtor(s):

Nanci Jessie Munoz Represented By Alon Darvish

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-18734

Eduardo Javier Meza and Margaret Ruth Morales

Chapter 13 #153.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 187

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eduardo Javier Meza Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Margaret Ruth Morales Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-18942

Genaro Flores and Salome Flores

Chapter 13 #154.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 86

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Genaro Flores Represented By Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Salome Flores Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-19069

Zulu A Ali

Chapter 13 #155.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 123

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Zulu A Ali Represented By

Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-19338

Jesus Aguilar and Maria G Aguilar

Chapter 13 #156.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Aguilar Represented By

Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria G Aguilar Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-19523

Torri Walker

Chapter 13 #157.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Torri Walker Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-19804

Juan M Madueno Carrizoza

Chapter 13 #158.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 68

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Zachary Lee Nowak Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-20062

Lilia Ivethe Fong

Chapter 13 #162.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lilia Ivethe Fong Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-20150

Kevin Kim Nettles and Sara Margaret Nettles

Chapter 13 #163.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 81

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kevin Kim Nettles Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Sara Margaret Nettles Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-20153

Rama Cokrohadian Suhari

Chapter 13 #164.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rama Cokrohadian Suhari Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-20488

Roselia Hernandez

Chapter 13 #165.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roselia Hernandez Represented By Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-20531

Amber Larae Holmes

Chapter 13 #166.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Amber Larae Holmes Represented By Yoon O Ham

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-21292

Debra Denise Barr

Chapter 13 #167.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FLD 7/2/18

Party Information

Debra Denise Barr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-21548

Chi Kan Yu

Chapter 13 #168.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 156

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael J. Waters Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-22294

Jonathan William Nicastro

Chapter 13 #172.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 121

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jonathan William Nicastro Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:15-22392

Donald Leroy Woodruff

Chapter 13 #173.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 111

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAW OF MOTION FILED 6/13/18

Party Information

Donald Leroy Woodruff Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-10257

Cecilia Orozco and Sergio Orozco

Chapter 13 #174.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cecilia Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie

Joint Debtor(s):

Sergio Orozco Represented By Majid Safaie

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-10352

Helen Kanari Lewis

Chapter 13 #175.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 67

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Helen Kanari Lewis Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-10369

Melvin T. Marks and Maria S Peponas

Chapter 13 #176.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 55

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Edward Horton Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11303

Joseph Robert Byrne and Hillary Allyne Byrne

Chapter 13 #182.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 116

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Robert Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Hillary Allyne Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11370

Gary Janssen

Chapter 13 #183.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Janssen Represented By

Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11780

Laurie L Burns

Chapter 13 #184.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 91

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Laurie L Burns Represented By Javier H Castillo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11794

ROBERT A HAGUE and DIANNE L HAGUE

Chapter 13 #185.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 110

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/17/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

ROBERT A HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer

Joint Debtor(s):

DIANNE L HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11872

Garan Bales

Chapter 13 #186.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 129

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Garan Bales Represented By

Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-11873

Juan Figueroa and Nancy Figueroa

Chapter 13 #187.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Figueroa Represented By

Inez Tinoco-Vaca

Debtor(s):

Valicia LaShawn Fennell Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12400

Ernestine Steppes

Chapter 13 #192.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernestine Steppes Represented By Mathew Alden

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12453

Michael Joseph Fodor

Chapter 13 #193.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 58

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Joseph Fodor Represented By Michael R Totaro Michael D Franco

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12609

Ryan J. Watson

Chapter 13 #194.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ryan J. Watson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12849

Elsy G. Mejia

Chapter 13 #195.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Joint Debtor(s):

Elsy G. Mejia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12963

Kenneth L Salser

Chapter 13 #196.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kenneth L Salser Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-12982

Edward A. Moore, Jr. and Carole Moore

Chapter 13 #197.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edward A. Moore Jr. Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Carole Moore Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-13030

Richard Hill Lindsay and Laura Lee Lindsay

Chapter 13 #198.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 109

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Hill Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Joint Debtor(s):

Laura Lee Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-13226

Michael J. Covington, II

Chapter 13 #199.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Benito Gonzalez Cardenas Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-13729

Bradly Scott Aduddell

Chapter 13 #203.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 73

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bradly Scott Aduddell Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-13872

Kimberly Ann Bowen

Chapter 13 #204.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 55

Party Information

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14287

Brent Duane Larson and Sarah Marnet Larson

Chapter 13 #208.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 77

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brent Duane Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford

Joint Debtor(s):

Sarah Marnet Larson Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14440

Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino

Chapter 13 #209.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 62

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats

Joint Debtor(s):

Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14476

Juan Rene Fullen, Jr.

Chapter 13 #210.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 64

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Rene Fullen Jr. Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14548

Lavelle Lee Parker

Chapter 13 #211.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lavelle Lee Parker Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14599

Brooke R Adams

Chapter 13 #212.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 56

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brooke R Adams Represented By Lauren Rode

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-14987

Susana Olga Corona

Chapter 13 #213.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 113

Warren Thomas Derry Represented By Christopher C Barsness

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #223.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 140

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16757

John W Bennett and Mary Bennett

Chapter 13 #224.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/6/18

Party Information

John W Bennett Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Mary Bennett Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16856

Tony Apodaca and Lydia Apodaca

Chapter 13 #225.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Tony Apodaca Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Lydia Apodaca Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16909

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Chapter 13 #226.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 185

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16910

Noryvir Frondozo Bequilla

Chapter 13 #227.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 48

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Noryvir Frondozo Bequilla Represented By Scott Kosner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-16946

Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue

Chapter 13 #228.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Debtor(s):

Oraib Innabi

Chapter 13 #231.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 70

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Oraib Innabi Represented By

Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-17765

Mary Jones

Chapter 13 #232.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 51

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mary Jones Represented By

Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-17770

Edward J. Galvan and Virginia Galvan

Chapter 13 #233.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

1:00 PM

6:16-18190

John Adam Tribue, IV

Chapter 13 #243.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 67

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Adam Tribue IV Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18248

Juan Jose Franco

Chapter 13 #244.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 86

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Jose Franco Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18359

Joseph Liebgott, IV and Robby Jean Harrison

Chapter 13 #245.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 80

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Liebgott IV Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Robby Jean Harrison Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18372

Gene Ashley Heisser, Jr.

Chapter 13 #246.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 75

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gene Ashley Heisser Jr. Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18398

Jose Luis Rojas

Chapter 13 #247.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 80

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Luis Rojas Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18430

Isaias Melo and Rosa Melo

Chapter 13 #248.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 62

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Isaias Melo Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosa Melo Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18529

Ricardo Carranza and Teresa D. Sotelo

Chapter 13 #249.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ricardo Carranza Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Teresa D. Sotelo Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18546

Alexis I Barahona

Chapter 13 #250.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alexis I Barahona Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18621

John Wesley Wilson, Jr. and Michelle Janet Wilson

Chapter 13 #251.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 51

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Wesley Wilson Jr. Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Michelle Janet Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-18820

Chase D Chung

Chapter 13 #252.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 58

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chase D Chung Represented By Daniel C Sever

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19018

Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz

Chapter 13 #253.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz Represented By

Danny K Agai

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19070

Michele Helen Murillo

Chapter 13 #254.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 57

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michele Helen Murillo Represented By Joshua R Driskell

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19199

Eduardo Lopez

Chapter 13 #255.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 65

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eduardo Lopez Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19207

Marquis Vincent Campbell

Chapter 13 #256.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 86

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/19/18

Party Information

Marquis Vincent Campbell Represented By Eliza Ghanooni

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19240

Octavio Rubio Mata

Chapter 13 #257.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Octavio Rubio Mata Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-19396

Pamela Lynn King

Chapter 13 #258.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernest Leyva Represented By

Brad Weil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20109

Gilberto Herrera and Monica Herrera

Chapter 13 #263.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 57

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTON FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilberto Herrera Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Monica Herrera Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20132

Maynor Obdulio Cruz and Monica Ivonne Villeda Lopez

Chapter 13 #264.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

Donald John Hanson and Mary Merzella Hanson

Chapter 13 #267.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Donald John Hanson Represented By Manfred Schroer

Joint Debtor(s):

Mary Merzella Hanson Represented By Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20258

Matthew Bruce and Scott Bruce

Chapter 13 #268.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/17/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Matthew Bruce Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Scott Bruce Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20329

Gabriel Cruz

Chapter 13 #269.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 68

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gabriel Cruz Represented By

Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20402

Johanna R. Lagandaon

Chapter 13 #270.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Johanna R. Lagandaon Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20459

Winnie Marie Quanstrom

Chapter 13 #271.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Irma Hernandez Represented By David T Egli

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-20967

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13 #276.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman

Joint Debtor(s):

Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-21047

Maria Avila

Chapter 7 #277.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maria Avila Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-21213

Bartholemew James Ratner and Pamela J Armijo-Ratner

Chapter 13 #278.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bartholemew James Ratner Represented By

H Christopher Coburn

Joint Debtor(s):

Pamela J Armijo-Ratner Represented By

H Christopher Coburn

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-21234

Frank A Horzen and Barbara A Horzen

Chapter 13 #279.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 90

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Barbara A Horzen Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-21236

Ronald A Waters and Trisha Waters

Chapter 13 #280.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ronald A Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Trisha Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-21299

Spencer Kogut and Suzette Andrea Kogut

Chapter 13 #281.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 112

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Spencer Kogut Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Suzette Andrea Kogut Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10082

Francisco R Palacios

Chapter 13 #282.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 152

Alma Angelica Rubio Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10360

Jerome Petras Oakman and Angella Jean Oakman

Chapter 13 #286.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jerome Petras Oakman Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Angella Jean Oakman Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10414

Felipe Morales

Chapter 13 #287.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 26

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Felipe Morales Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10460

Julio Cesar Cacho and Rosalie Ann Cacho

Chapter 13 #288.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Julio Cesar Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosalie Ann Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13 #289.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 90

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10667

Louis Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #290.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 45

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Louis Gutierrez Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10768

Amy K. Arias

Chapter 13 #291.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ester Cruz Represented By

Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-10982

Ruby Duran Garcia

Chapter 13 #295.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

6/7/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ruby Duran Garcia Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11028

James W Schwartz and Holly L Bryson

Chapter 13 #296.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James W Schwartz Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Holly L Bryson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11131

Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles

Chapter 13 #297.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11167

Victor Thomas Lawton

Chapter 13 #298.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Victor Thomas Lawton Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11177

Gary Wayne Turner and Wanda Renay Turner

Chapter 13 #299.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Wayne Turner Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Joint Debtor(s):

Wanda Renay Turner Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11182

Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton

Chapter 13 #300.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 45

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Renard Louis Hamilton Represented By

D Justin Harelik

Joint Debtor(s):

Regina Elizabeth Hamilton Represented By

D Justin Harelik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11245

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Ray Sandoval Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11565

Bruce A. Gooch and Nicolette Gooch

Chapter 13 #305.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bruce A. Gooch Represented By

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gregory Dwight Vit Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-11901

Jose Camacho Payan and Erika Vanessa Payan

Chapter 13 #309.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Veronica A Mendoza Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12149

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13 #313.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cindi Jo Metzger Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12576

Edmundo Sabado, Jr.

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lawrence Devon Shaw Represented By

L. Tegan Rodkey

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12710

Michael Montoya

Chapter 13 #322.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Montoya Represented By Suzette Douglas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12712

Jose Luis Castillo

Chapter 13 #323.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 26

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Luis Castillo Represented By Sunita N Sood

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12719

Fernando Herrera, III

Chapter 13 #324.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Herrera III Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12758

Luis A Jovel

Chapter 13 #325.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Luis A Jovel Represented By

Manfred Schroer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12777

Glennard Williams and Bertrevia Daniellie Williams

Chapter 13 #326.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 45

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Glennard Williams Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Bertrevia Daniellie Williams Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12794

Katina Deneen Edwards

Chapter 13 #327.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 55

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Katina Deneen Edwards Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-12930

Olivia Lopez

Chapter 13 #328.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Olivia Lopez Represented By

William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13032

Victor Warrenlee Anastasi, Jr. and Diane Lynne Anastasi

Chapter 13 #329.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

Party Information

Debtor(s):

6/7/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Marie Cooper Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Albert Cooper Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13092

Debra J. Falcone and Charles W. Blackburn

Chapter 13 #333.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Debra J. Falcone Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Charles W. Blackburn Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13095

Isabel M Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #334.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Isabel M Gutierrez Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13107

Angel Benavidez

Chapter 13 #335.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

Party Information

Biani Berlenda Mora Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13387

Gwendolyn O. Doss

Chapter 13 #339.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gwendolyn O. Doss Represented By Alon Darvish

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13395

Valecia Renee Knox

Chapter 13 #340.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Ramos Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13729

Paula Rosales

Chapter 13 #344.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 25

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Paula Rosales Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13809

Jose R. Castaneda and Miriam L Castaneda

Chapter 13 #345.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 62

* VACATED * REASON: WITHRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Joint Debtor(s):

Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-13820

Guadalupe Espinoza

Chapter 13 #346.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Docket 52

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Israel Samuel Rolon Represented By William S Tilton

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14075

Stephanie Lobato

Chapter 13 #353.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Stephanie Lobato Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14157

Joe Wallace Brown and Yolanda Denise Moore

Chapter 13 #354.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe Wallace Brown Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Yolanda Denise Moore Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14187

Andre J Booker and Carrie L Booker

Chapter 13 #355.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Andre J Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Carrie L Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14210

Nathaniel E Palmer

Chapter 13 #356.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Patrick Goode Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Valorie Ruth Goode Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14469

Mario Timothy Velasquez and Susan Lorraine Velasquez

Chapter 13 #361.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mario Timothy Velasquez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Lorraine Velasquez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14588

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng

Chapter 13 #362.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 50

* VACATED * REASON: WITHRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14619

Candice Maria Borrego

Chapter 13 #363.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Candice Maria Borrego Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14650

Brian Eugene Anderson and Gina Marie Anderson

Chapter 13 #364.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brian Eugene Anderson Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Gina Marie Anderson Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14656

Kimberly A. Miller

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sadia Sohail Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14790

Ernesto Ayon Lopez and Dolores Millan Sanchez

Chapter 13 #369.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernesto Ayon Lopez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Dolores Millan Sanchez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-14798

Gail Katherine Stump

Chapter 13 #370.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gail Katherine Stump Represented By Michael E Clark

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15032

Ruben Lopez and Jessica Lopez

Chapter 13 #371.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ruben Lopez Represented By

Terrence Fantauzzi

Joint Debtor(s):

Jessica Lopez Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15102

Gwendolyn Washington

Chapter 13 #372.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 72

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15122

Keith F Keating

Chapter 13 #373.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Keith F Keating Represented By Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15227

John E Neilsen, Sr and Kathy A Neilsen

Chapter 13 #374.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 55

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John E Neilsen Sr Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Kathy A Neilsen Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15285

Trevor D. Washington and Sandra Washington

Chapter 13 #375.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Trevor D. Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Sandra Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15343

Jose Gabriel Sahagun, Jr.

Chapter 13 #376.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 20

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Thanaa Victor Fransis Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15604

Mandy Catron

Chapter 13 #380.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mandy Catron Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15646

Elida Soto

Chapter 13 #381.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Elida Soto Represented By

William G Cort

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15647

Omar Enrique Lopez

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jemill M Humphrey Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15728

Jesus Angel Acosta and Maria Teresa Acosta

Chapter 13 #386.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/17/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Angel Acosta Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Teresa Acosta Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13 #387.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 64

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Gehrig Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15772

Annette Leshon Rudd

Chapter 13 #388.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Annette Leshon Rudd Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15829

Allen Bravo

Chapter 13 #389.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-15987

Frank Heredia and Virginia Heredia

Chapter 13 #393.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Heredia Represented By Laleh Ensafi

Joint Debtor(s):

Virginia Heredia Represented By Laleh Ensafi

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16041

Daniel Garcia and Maria Garcia

Chapter 13 #394.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Daniel Garcia Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Garcia Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16073

Karsten Sanders

Chapter 13 #395.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/8/18

Party Information

Karsten Sanders Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16114

Allan Omar Ramos

Chapter 13 #396.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/20/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Allan Omar Ramos Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16164

William Richard Newborg and Serina Rae Newborg

Chapter 13 #397.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Richard Newborg Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Joint Debtor(s):

Serina Rae Newborg Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16217

Jorge Cristobal Green

Chapter 13 #398.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ruben Quintero Palafox Jr. Represented By Yoon O Ham

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16267

Samuel T Saavedra and Suzanne M Saavedra

Chapter 13 #402.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 44

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Samuel T Saavedra Represented By Michael R Totaro

Joint Debtor(s):

Suzanne M Saavedra Represented By Michael R Totaro

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16295

Coe Lamoureux and Julie Lamoureux

Chapter 13 #403.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Coe Lamoureux Represented By

W. Derek May

Joint Debtor(s):

Julie Lamoureux Represented By

W. Derek May

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16337

Ty Nicholas Garner, Sr. and Diane Lynn Garner

Chapter 13 #404.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ty Nicholas Garner Sr. Represented By Richard E Chang

Joint Debtor(s):

Diane Lynn Garner Represented By Richard E Chang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16349

Richard Alan Alvarez and Diana Marie Alvarez

Chapter 13 #405.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alejandro Lawrence Bernal Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16542

Mike A. Granados, Jr. and Carolynne Jeannette Granados

Chapter 13 #409.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mike A. Granados Jr. Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Joint Debtor(s):

Carolynne Jeannette Granados Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld Gabriella Gonzales

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16666

Frank Ramirez

Chapter 13 #410.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Ramirez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16667

Linda Revoner

Chapter 13 #411.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Linda Revoner Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16669

Kalenga Patrick Munongo and Janelle Nicole Munongo

Chapter 13 #412.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kalenga Patrick Munongo Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Janelle Nicole Munongo Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16699

Cindy Louise Lawson

Chapter 13 #413.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16751

Gary Ramirez and Christina Faith Ramirez

Chapter 13 #414.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Ramirez Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Joint Debtor(s):

Christina Faith Ramirez Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16759

Armando Montoya, Jr. and Isabel Anne Montoya

Chapter 13 #415.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Armando Montoya Jr. Represented By Aruna P Rodrigo

Joint Debtor(s):

Isabel Anne Montoya Represented By Aruna P Rodrigo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16795

Artush Stepanian and Wendy L. Wilkie

Chapter 13 #416.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Artush Stepanian Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Joint Debtor(s):

Wendy L. Wilkie Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16796

Lisa Tompkins

Chapter 13 #417.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 20

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lisa Tompkins Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16798

William R. Martin and Judy L. Martin

Chapter 13 #418.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William R. Martin Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Joint Debtor(s):

Judy L. Martin Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16945

Rickey Hernando Waddington and Elrena Victoria

Chapter 13 #419.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rickey Hernando Waddington Represented By Jonathan D Doan

Joint Debtor(s):

Elrena Victoria Waddington Represented By Jonathan D Doan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16962

Vanessa Moore-Moreland

Chapter 13 #420.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vanessa Moore-Moreland Represented By Kirk A Laron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-16992

Nicholas Charles Goodner and Jennifer Louise Goodner

Chapter 13 #421.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 25

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nicholas Charles Goodner Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Louise Goodner Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17037

Luis A Andrade and Sarah Marie Andrade

Chapter 13 #422.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Debtor(s):

Luis Fernando Montoya Jr. Represented By Anthony B Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17358

David Kevin Davidson and Lisa Marie Davidson

Chapter 13 #428.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 33

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Kevin Davidson Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Marie Davidson Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17402

Thomas Lee Abercrombie and Rebecca Anne Abercrombie

Chapter 13 #429.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Rebecca Anne Abercrombie Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17418

Deborah Thomas

Chapter 13 #430.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Deborah Thomas Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17469

Annette Culpepper

Chapter 13 #431.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Annette Culpepper Represented By Nathan Fransen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17502

Ray Valdepena, III

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Terry Neil Gaia Represented By Edward G Topolski

Joint Debtor(s):

Tamara Marie Devalle-Gaia Represented By Edward G Topolski

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17578

Kendra Susan Lewkow

Chapter 13 #436.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kendra Susan Lewkow Represented By Morton J Grabel

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17589

Ryan Patrick McHugh and Jennifer Lynne McHugh

Chapter 13 #437.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 45

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ryan Patrick McHugh Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Lynne McHugh Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17612

Jose Guadalupe Sandoval

Chapter 13 #438.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 22

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Guadalupe Sandoval Represented By Michael E Clark

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17715

Jorge Luis Luviano and Giovanna Toledo De Luviano

Chapter 13 #439.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jorge Luis Luviano Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Giovanna Toledo De Luviano Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17757

Justin Lee Martin and Ashley Ann Martin

Chapter 13 #440.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Justin Lee Martin Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Ashley Ann Martin Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17806

Gerald Curtis Collins and Valerie Cecelia Collins

Chapter 13 #441.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gerald Curtis Collins Represented By

Docket 36

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ignacio Figueroa Represented By

Ghada Helena Philips

Joint Debtor(s):

Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa Represented By

Ghada Helena Philips

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-17942

Viorel Bucur

Chapter 13 #446.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 78

Julio C. Davila Represented By Michael Jay Berger

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18340

Cary Allen Griggs and Heather Lynn Griggs

Chapter 13 #456.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cary Allen Griggs Represented By Ronald W Ask

Joint Debtor(s):

Heather Lynn Griggs Represented By Ronald W Ask

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18366

Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill

Chapter 13 #457.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/12/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18388

Gregorio Orozco Sotelo

Chapter 13 #458.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gregorio Orozco Sotelo Represented By

Lisa F Collins-Williams

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18482

Roberto Garcia Garcia and Maria Martha Garcia

Chapter 13 #459.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roberto Garcia Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Martha Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18507

Johnny Alcala

Chapter 13 #460.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/20/18

Party Information

Carolyn Joyce Brooks Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18569

Lelang Fulwiler

Chapter 13 #464.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rafeek Nehman Hamada Represented By

Eric Bensamochan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-18897

Armando Hermosillo

Chapter 13 #473.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Armando Hermosillo Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-19027

Jaime Villalobos and Jennifer Villalobos

Chapter 13 #474.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jaime Villalobos Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brian Anthony Paciorkowski Represented By Kristin R Lamar

Joint Debtor(s):

Donna Ann Paciorkowski Represented By Kristin R Lamar

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-19132

Juan A Martinez

Chapter 13 #478.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Debtor(s):

Wasantha K. Leonidas Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-19790

Angel Rodriguez

Chapter 13 #487.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Angel Rodriguez Represented By Nancy Korompis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-19853

Diego Lopez

Chapter 13 #488.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 31

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Diego Lopez Represented By

Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20019

Frank Prouty

Chapter 13 #489.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 51

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Prouty Represented By

Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20055

Laquance Denise Mejia

Chapter 13 #490.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Laquance Denise Mejia Represented By Cynthia A Dunning

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20072

Lawrence Edmond, III

Chapter 13 #491.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lawrence Edmond III Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20114

Frank Garcia and Susan Garcia

Chapter 13 #492.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Garcia Represented By

Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20117

Tiffany Venice Turner

Chapter 13 #493.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Tiffany Venice Turner Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20121

Agustin Napolion Joya and Dora Maria Joya

Chapter 13 #494.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Agustin Napolion Joya Represented By Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Dora Maria Joya Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20140

Laurie Frances Bigelow

Chapter 13 #495.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 25

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/13/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Laurie Frances Bigelow Represented By Kevin Tang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20147

Gilbert Richard Enriquez and Lisa Lynn Enriquez

Chapter 13 #496.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilbert Richard Enriquez Represented By

Raj T Wadhwani

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Lynn Enriquez Represented By

Raj T Wadhwani

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20177

Randal Scott Oakley and Christine Ann Oakley

Chapter 13 #497.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Randal Scott Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston

Joint Debtor(s):

Christine Ann Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20187

Michael Adam Moore

Chapter 13 #498.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Adam Moore Represented By Brad Weil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20217

Gregory Lincoln and Norma Araceli Lincoln

Chapter 13 #499.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gregory Lincoln Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Norma Araceli Lincoln Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20240

Natona Smith and Tameiko Smith

Chapter 13 #500.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carolyn Agtang Glenn Represented By

D Justin Harelik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20367

Charles Lee Dismukes

Chapter 13 #504.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 33

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/19/18

Party Information

Ann Marie Smith

Chapter 13 #511.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ann Marie Smith Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20489

Michael S McGowan and Brandy L McGowan

Chapter 13 #512.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael S McGowan Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Joint Debtor(s):

Brandy L McGowan Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20629

Frank Mike Gonzales and Stacey Lynn Gonzales

Chapter 13 #513.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Mike Gonzales Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Stacey Lynn Gonzales Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-20630

Jennifer Heredia

Chapter 13 #514.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

Docket 33

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Patricia Cuen Represented By

Kelly F Ryan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10039

Shelley R. Long

Chapter 13 #518.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Shelley R. Long Represented By

James D. Hornbuckle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10079

Cheryl Linda Fernandez

Chapter 13 #519.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 56

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 5/31/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cheryl Linda Fernandez Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10111

Wanny Chansy

Chapter 13 #520.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

Chapter 13 #523.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vernita Goodwin Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10189

Belen L. Rubio

Chapter 13 #524.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Belen L. Rubio Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10209

Ertun Reshat and Hale Reshat

Chapter 13 #525.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ertun Reshat Represented By

April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Hale Reshat Represented By

April E Roberts

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10240

Guillermo Zamudio

Chapter 13 #526.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Guillermo Zamudio Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10248

Vaughn Stevens

Chapter 13 #527.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 34

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/19/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vaughn Stevens Represented By Amanda G Billyard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10261

Nereeka Tamar Haynes

Chapter 13 #528.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nereeka Tamar Haynes Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10328

Amanda Martinez

Chapter 13 #529.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Amanda Martinez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10329

Mohammed A Nazir and Boshara Nazir

Chapter 13 #530.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FLD 7/2/18

Party Information

Mohammed A Nazir Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Boshara Nazir Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10342

Urbano Zamora and Esther Zamora

Chapter 13 #531.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Allen Rose Jr. Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Karen Sue Rose Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10467

Wayman L Guider

Chapter 13 #538.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/5/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Wayman L Guider Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10496

Luis Fuentes Moreno

Chapter 13 #539.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/18/18

Party Information

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10636

Alejandro J. Casillas and Patricia Casillas

Chapter 13 #543.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alejandro J. Casillas Represented By Tina H Trinh

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Casillas Represented By Tina H Trinh

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10637

Felipe Gonzalez Plasencia

Chapter 13 #544.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Felipe Gonzalez Plasencia Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10732

Calvin S. Winn and Diana M. Winn

Chapter 13 #545.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Calvin S. Winn Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Diana M. Winn Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10741

Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical

Chapter 13 #546.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10750

Kim Onpaeng

Chapter 13 #547.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 20

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kim Onpaeng Represented By Steven J Diamond

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10801

Michael Christopher Oropallo and Lauren Elaine Oropallo

Chapter 13 #548.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/28/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Christopher Oropallo Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Lauren Elaine Oropallo Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10825

William Thomas Pedrino and Terri Lyn Pedrino

Chapter 13 #549.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 51

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Thomas Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Terri Lyn Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10829

Roberto Rolon Rodriguez and Maria Rolon

Chapter 13 #550.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/3/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roberto Rolon Rodriguez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Rolon Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10847

Anna Rosa Lopez

Chapter 13 #551.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anna Rosa Lopez Represented By Raymond Perez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10850

Eugene Peter Roman, Jr. and Sylvia Roman

Chapter 13 #552.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/16/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Candyce Flemister Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10957

Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson

Chapter 13 #559.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 35

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Damaris Denise Redgray-Johnson Represented By

Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-10958

Jose Reyes Agredano

Chapter 13 #560.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/18/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Reyes Agredano Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11027

Moises Martinez

Chapter 13 #561.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edgardo Aranda Represented By Paul Y Lee

Debtor(s):

Ruben Munoz Tovar Represented By Sunita N Sood

Joint Debtor(s):

Sandra Isabel Garcia Represented By Sunita N Sood

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11179

Christopher G. Templeton

Chapter 13 #568.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 33

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/12/18

Party Information

Christopher G. Templeton Represented By Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11212

Diana J Everett

Chapter 13 #569.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Jeffrey R Powell Represented By David L Nelson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11363

John Louis Baumann and Tracey Leigh Baumann

Chapter 13 #574.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Louis Baumann Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Tracey Leigh Baumann Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11403

Dony M Portillo and Raquel A Portillo

Chapter 13 #575.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 33

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Dony M Portillo Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Raquel A Portillo Represented By Paul Y Lee Andrea Liddick

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11406

Karen Ann Staff

Chapter 13 #576.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 26

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Karen Ann Staff Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11407

Rushelyn Napalan

Chapter 13 #577.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/2/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rushelyn Napalan Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11416

Darlene J. Wadler

Chapter 13 #578.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 29

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Darlene J. Wadler Represented By Michael Jay Berger

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11476

Randy Saulsberry and Kimberly E May

Chapter 13 #579.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Randy Saulsberry Represented By David L Nelson

Joint Debtor(s):

Kimberly E May Represented By David L Nelson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11520

Kiia Chree Wilson

Chapter 13 #580.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/26/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kiia Chree Wilson Represented By Gordon L Dayton

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11529

Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya

Chapter 13 #581.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/11/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11532

Marsha Elizabeth Hall

Chapter 13 #582.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 24

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/21/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Marsha Elizabeth Hall Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11652

Gwendolyn Priscilla Saunders

Chapter 13 #583.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gwendolyn Priscilla Saunders Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11653

Richard Espinoza

Chapter 13 #584.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 25

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/27/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Espinoza Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11692

Michael James Gresham

Chapter 13 #585.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 23

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael James Gresham Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-11700

Damion Marshall and Marshariki Frazier

Chapter 13 #586.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 33

Docket 27

Debtor(s):

Carmen Lopez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-12022

Maribel M Vasquez

Chapter 13 #593.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 21

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOITON FILED 7/17/18

Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-12189

Keely J Barrett

Chapter 13 #597.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 21

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Keely J Barrett Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-12231

Brian Howell and Faythe Howell

Chapter 13 #598.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 25

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

7/9/18

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brian Howell Represented By

Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Faythe Howell Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:14-12516

John Alexander Jay

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 45 Camino Real, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270

MOVANT: MTGLQ INVESTORS LP

Docket 200

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:

7/24/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Debtor’s confirmed plan provided for Debtor to surrender his interest in the real property at issue, and the plan does not treat Movant’s claim. Therefore, as to Debtor, Movant has established cause for relief from the automatic stay.

As to Movant’s request for relief from the co-debtor stay, the Court notes that the co- debtor at issue here, Debtor’s former spouse, appears to have been served with the motion and failed to file opposition, which the Court can deem consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h). More importantly, 11 U.S.C. §1301(c)

provides that the Court must grant relief from the co-debtor stay if "the plan filed by the debtor proposes not to pay such claim." Therefore, relief from the co-debtor stay is appropriate.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Alexander Jay Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

John Alexander Jay

Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Chapter 13

MTGLQ Investors, LP Represented By Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-14652

Donald Ray Eskridge

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14798 Ladybird Lane, Victorville, CA 92394

MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC

From: 6/20/18 EH

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Donald Ray Eskridge Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC Represented By John D Schlotter

Karrollanne K Cayce Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-16128

Delkys Hyde

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35571 Sugar Maple St Murrieta, CA 92563

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

From: 4/24/18, 6/5/18 EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

On March 29, 2018, Debtor filed a Motion for Authority to Sell the Property. Debtor has indicated that he intends to pay off the Movant and remainder of the chapter 13 plan through escrow. The Trustee has recommended approval of the sale. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for 30 days for Debtor to finalize sale.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Delkys Hyde Represented By

David L Nelson

Movant(s):

Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Bonni S Mantovani

S Renee Sawyer Blume Alexander G Meissner

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Delkys Hyde

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-16240

Dorothy Mae Simmons

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1047 Riviera Ct., Beaumont, California 92223

MOVANT: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

Docket 51

* VACATED * REASON: STIPULATED APO ENTERED 7/18/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Dorothy Mae Simmons Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Movant(s):

LakeView Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-11658

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Chapter 13 #5.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3974 Quartzite Lane, San Bernardino, CA 92407-0420

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 2/6/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18, 5/8/18, 6/5/18, 7/10/18 EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/20/18

Tentative Ruling:

2/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank National Association Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Armin M Kolenovic Jamie D Hanawalt

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-12794

Katina Deneen Edwards

Chapter 13 #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 27183 Lasso Way, Corona, CA 92883

MOVANT: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: No

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Katina Deneen Edwards Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Daniel K Fujimoto Caren J Castle

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-14684

Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert

Chapter 7 #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Unlawful Detainer

MOVANT: SUNG ELLISON AND KELLY ELLISON

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

On June 4, 2017, Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert ("Debtors" or "Defendants") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Defendants had a previous bankruptcy case filed on October 1, 2004, and received a discharge on January 7, 2005.

On June 28, 2018, Kelly and Sung Ellison ("Creditors" or "Plaintiffs") filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay, requesting, in part, annulment of the automatic stay. The Plaintiffs own a mobile home park and had a lease agreement with the Defendants for one unit. The Plaintiffs assert that the unit currently controlled by and leased to the Defendants is falling into disrepair and its condition encourages the homeless to occupy it. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants are subleasing the unit to tenants without paying rent to the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs seek to annul the stay to evict all occupants and remove the mobile home unit from the park.

11 U.S.C. § 362(d) states:

10:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert

Chapter 7

(d) On request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, the court shall grant relief from the stay provided, under subsection (a) of this section such as by terminating, annulling, modifying, or condition such stay –

(emphasis added); see also In re Schwartz, 954 F.2d 569, 573 (9th Cir. 1992) ("If a creditor obtains retroactive relief under section 362(d), there is no violation of the automatic stay, and whether violations of the stay are void or voidable is not at issue.").

The BAP, in In re Fjeldsted, noted the absence of a clear standard for annulment of the automatic stay. 293 B.R. 12, 21 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2003) ("There is less appellate clarity, however, in enunciating a test for retroactive stay relief. Inconsistent standards have thus developed, which run the gamut from such relief being justified only in ‘extreme circumstances’ to giving the court ‘wide latitude’ to ‘balance the equities’ on a case-by-case basis."). The BAP’s most recent announcement of the standard for annulment of the automatic stay stated the following:

Determining whether cause exists to annul the stay is a case-by-case inquiry based on a balance of the equities. In conducting this inquiry the bankruptcy court, among other factors, should consider whether the creditor knew of the bankruptcy when violating the stay and whether the debtor’s conduct was unreasonable, inequitable or prejudicial to the creditor.

In Fjeldsted, we approved additional factors for consideration in assessing the equities. The twelve nonexclusive factors are: (1) number of filings; (2) whether, in a repeat filing case, the circumstances indicate an intention to delay and hinder creditors; (3) a weighing of the extent of prejudice to

10:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert

creditors or third parties if the stay relief is not made retroactive, including whether harm exists to a bona fide purchaser; (4) the debtor’s overall good faith (totality of circumstances test); (5) whether creditors knew of stay but nonetheless took action, thus compounding the problem; (6) whether the debtor has complied, and is otherwise complying, with the Bankruptcy Code and Rules; (7) the relative ease of restoring parties to the status quo ante; (8) the costs of annulment to debtors and creditors; (9) how quickly creditors moved for annulment, or how quickly debtor moved to set aside the sale or violative conduct; (10) whether, after learning of the bankruptcy, creditors proceeded to take steps in continued violation of the stay, or whether they moved expeditiously to gain relief; (11) whether annulment of the stay will

Chapter 7

cause irreparable injury to the debtor; and (12) whether stay relief will promote judicial economy or other efficiencies. The Panel in Fjeldsted cautioned that the twelve factors are merely a framework for analysis and not a scorecard, and that in any given case, one factor may so outweigh the others as to be dispositive.

In re Estavan Capital LLC, 2015 WL 7758494 at *5 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2015) (citations and quotations omitted).

While Fjeldsted cautioned that the enumerated factors are not a scorecard, many of the factors suggest that the stay should be annulled. Plaintiffs allege that they were not made aware of the bankruptcy proceedings until they were served with answers to the unlawful detainer complaints shortly before trial. While the Defendants only have one prior filing, there is great prejudice to creditors if the stay is not annulled. The units are in continuing disrepair, and the Plaintiffs allege that the units are being rented out to unauthorized occupants while they do not receive pay. Plaintiffs did not disregard the stay since they did not know it existed, and they moved expeditiously to gain relief. If the stay is annulled, Plaintiffs can most efficiently and expediently restore the units to the status quo ante, and prevent further costs to the parties.

The Curtis factors determine whether relief from stay to permit pending litigation to continue in another forum is appropriate. In re Curtis, 40 B.R. 795 (Bankr. D. Utah

10:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert

Chapter 7

1984) (cited with approval in In re Plumberex Specialty Prod., Inc., 311 B.R. 551, 559 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2004) and Kronemyer v. American Contractors Indem. Co. (In re Kronemyer), 405 B.R. 915, 921 (9th Cir. BAP 2009)). The twelve Curtis factors are: (1) whether the relief will result in a partial or complete resolution of the issues;

(2) the lack of any connection with or interference with the bankruptcy case; (3) whether the foreign proceeding involves the debtor as a fiduciary; (4) whether a specialized tribunal has been established to hear the particular cause of action and whether that tribunal has the expertise to hear such cases; (5) whether the debtor's insurance carrier has assumed full financial responsibility for defending the litigation;

(6) whether the action essentially involves third parties, and the debtor functions only as a bailee or conduit for the goods or proceeds in question; (7) whether the litigation in another forum would prejudice the interests of other creditors, the creditors' committee and other interested parties; (8) whether the judgment claim arising from the foreign action is subject to equitable subordination under Section 510(c); (9) whether movant's success in the foreign proceeding would result in a judicial lien avoidable by the debtor under Section 522(f); (10) the interests of judicial economy and the expeditious and economical determination of litigation for the parties; (11) whether the foreign proceedings have progressed to the point where the parties are prepared for trial; and (12) the impact of the stay on the parties and the "balance of hurt."

Here, this is a Chapter 7 proceeding, the estate’s interest in the premises which are the subject of the state court proceeding is merely possessory in nature, the conclusion of the state court proceeding would completely resolve the issues while not interfering with the liquidation of the bankruptcy case or prejudicing the interests of creditors, and the state court has specialized knowledge and expedited procedures for addressing the issues at hand. Furthermore, the bankruptcy proceeding is only still active due to the apparent lack of quick cooperation of Debtors (as evidenced by fourteen continuations of the meeting of creditors) and a pending objection to discharge adversary proceeding. As a result, it is clear that the equities weigh in favor of granting the motion; several of the Curtis factors (specifically factors 1, 2, 4, 7, 11, and 12) weigh in favor of granting the motion, while none of the Curtis factors weigh in favor of denial.

10:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert and Lisa Renee Lambert

Chapter 7

Furthermore, Debtors have failed to oppose the instant motion, which the Court deems consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h).

The Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1), GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT annulment of the automatic stay.

GRANT request under ¶ 6.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Movant(s):

Kelly Ellison Represented By

W. Derek May

Sung Ellison Represented By

W. Derek May

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-15227

John E Neilsen, Sr and Kathy A Neilsen

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 41880 Lakefront Dr, Aguanga, CA 92536

MOVANT: TROJAN CAPITAL INVESTMENTS LLC

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief pursuant to § 362(d)(1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because it does not appear that the instant motion was served on any co-debtor as that termed is used in the applicable statute. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John E Neilsen Sr Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Kathy A Neilsen Represented By Julie J Villalobos

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

John E Neilsen, Sr and Kathy A Neilsen

Chapter 13

Trojan Capital Investment LLC Represented By Henry D Paloci Richard J Reynolds

Rafael R Garcia-Salgado

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-18282

Isabel Duran Garcia

Chapter 13 #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 84331 Volare Ave. Indio, CA 92203

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

From: 6/20/18 EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: APO ENTERED 6/20/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Isabel Duran Garcia Represented By Robert J Spitz

Movant(s):

Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10467

Wayman L Guider

Chapter 13 #10.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2756 La Salle Pointe, Chino Hills, CA 91709

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

From: 7/10/18 EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Wayman L Guider Pro Se

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12170

Pamela Ann Harris

Chapter 13 #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Honda Accord

MOVANT: FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12785

Nadia Joy Keehmer

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40974 Cebu Dr, Temecula, CA 92591

MOVANT: M&T BANK AS ATTORNEY IN FACT FOR LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 6/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nadia Joy Keehmer Represented By Marjorie S Archer

Movant(s):

M&T Bank as Attorney in Fact for Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13845

Sergio Garcia and Maria Guadalupe Garcia

Chapter 7 #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2008 Toyota Sequoia, Vin 5TDZY68A88S008808

MOVANT: RANDOLPH BROOKS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

07/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sergio Garcia Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Guadalupe Garcia Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Movant(s):

Randolph Brooks Federal Credit Represented By

Paul V Reza

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Sergio Garcia and Maria Guadalupe Garcia

Chapter 7

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14044

Boyd Eugene Givens

Chapter 7 #14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Toyota Camry

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT relief from Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Boyd Eugene Givens Pro Se

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14527

Anthony Benitez

Chapter 7 #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Scion FR-S

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

07/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anthony Benitez Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14857

Ernest M. Rivera, Jr.

Chapter 7 #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Dodge Charger, VIN 2C3CDXHG2GH163027

MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE LLC

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

07/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernest M. Rivera Jr. Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14902

Veronica Diazgranados

Chapter 7 #17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11825 Mt. Royal Court, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91737

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CASE DISMISSED: 6/29/18

Docket 9

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Veronica Diazgranados Pro Se

Movant(s):

The Bank of New York Mellon FKA Represented By

Tyneia Merritt

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15162

Mourence Eugene Burris

Chapter 7 #18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Toyota Prius with Exhibits A-C and Proof of Service.

MOVANT: CALIFORNIA COAST CREDIT UNION

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY relief from § 1301(a) stay because no co-debtor was served with the instant motion. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mourence Eugene Burris Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

California Coast Credit Union Represented By Lisa S Yun

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15325

Jimmy Lee Brown

Chapter 7 #19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 444 E Valley Blvd., Colton, California 92324

MOVANT: DONALD W. LITTLE AND JUNE A LITTLE

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

07/24/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d) (2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jimmy Lee Brown Pro Se

Movant(s):

Donald W Little and June A Little, Represented By

Julian K Bach

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15624

Hugo Perez

Chapter 7 #20.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1860 Bel Air Street, Corona, California 92881

MOVANT: 20 CAP FUND I, LLC

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Hugo Perez Pro Se

Movant(s):

20 Cap Fund I, LLC Represented By Daniel I Singer

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-19074

Amber Michelle Bradley

Chapter 7 #20.10 CONT Motion to Reopen Chapter 7 Case with Notice for the Purpose of Enforcing the Discharge Order

From: 7/19/18 EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Amber Michelle Bradley Represented By

Neelamjeet K Kahlon-Pfister Cory T Salisbury

Movant(s):

Amber Michelle Bradley Represented By

Neelamjeet K Kahlon-Pfister Neelamjeet K Kahlon-Pfister Cory T Salisbury

Cory T Salisbury

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #21.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18, 7/10/18 Also # 22 & 23

Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #22.00 Motion by Debtor to Sell Substantially All Assets of Debtor Free and Clear of Liens

Also # 21 & 23 EH

Docket 328

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/18

BACKGROUND

On December 1, 2017, Auto Strap Transport, LLC ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On March 6, 2018, a chief restructuring officer, Stephen Douglass (the "CRO"), was appointed on an interim basis, and, on April 11, 2018, appointed on a final basis. Now, relying on the estimates of the CRO, Debtor believes it will be at least six months before Debtor can become profitable, and, therefore, "Debtor has determined the best option for its creditors is to sell its assets." [Dkt. No. 328, pg. 8, lines 24-26]. On June 26, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to sell substantially all assets of Debtor free and clear of liens (the "Motion").

The basic terms of the Motion are the following: Debtor proposes to sell to Nations Fund I, LLC ("Nations"), Debtor’s largest secured creditor, all of Debtor’s assets which are not subject to purchase money security interests or leases with creditors other than Nations (the "Assets").1 The Motion contemplates Nations purchasing the Assets for the amount of $3,200,000, of which $2,950,000 is a credit bid, and

$250,000 in a cash payment to be predominantly used for payment of administrative claims. Debtor estimates that the Assets have a fair market value of $3,160,000.

1:00 PM

CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1) provides that Debtor may use, sell, or lease property of the estate outside of the ordinary course of business after notice and a hearing. The Court notes the following non-exclusive issues with the current version of the Motion:

Notice
FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(a) provides: "Notice of a proposed use, sale, or lease of property, than cash collateral, not in the ordinary course of business shall be given pursuant to Rule 2002(a)(2), (c)(1), (i), and (k) and, if applicable, in accordance with § 363(b)(2) of the Code." FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 2002(a)(2) requires the Motion to be served on all creditors, which does not appear to have been done here. Specifically, the Court notes that the petition in the instant case identifies 111 parties to receive notice, however, the Motion appears to have been served on substantially less than half that many entities.
Fair Market Value and Marketing

Local Rule 6004-(1)(c)(2)(A) provides that the Motion "must be supported by a declaration of the movant establishing the value of the property and that the terms and conditions of the proposed sale, including the price and all contingencies, are in the best interest of the estate." While the Motion does include a declaration of Debtor’s principal establishing a fair market value of $3.16 million, the Motion does not include any breakdown of that valuation or the comparables upon which the valuation was based. Additionally, the old adage that "value is what someone is willing to pay" is pertinent here. Section III.G of the Motion suggests that the marketing effort was possibly inadequate, and tardy at best. Specifically, the future tense verbiag of the section indicates that Debtor did not engage in any marketing prior to filing the motion. Debtor also stated it would file a supplement seven days before the sale hearing, however, such supplement was only filed the morning before the hearing,
1:00 PM
CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11
depriving the Court of ample time to review the submitted evidence. Additionally, Debtor did not submit the "due diligence package" it allegedly used in marketing. Finally, the late supplement filed indicates in paragraph 14 that a potential buyer has not yet rendered a decision on whether to overbid. Ultimately, in light of the evidence presented to the Court, the Court is unable to conclude that the rushed marketing effort is inadequate in light of the unusual and complex nature of the sale under consideration.
Miscellaneous Issues

-The Motion states that "Debtor is reviewing the tax consequences to the bankruptcy estate as a result of the proposed sale. Debtor will update the Court at the hearing as to the tax consequences, if any." [Dkt. No. 328, pg. 12, lines 4-5]. The Court intends to require that the estimation of tax consequences be included in the amended motion.

-The Motion fails to provide a breakdown of administrative, priority, and unsecured claims and the possible distribution to each class. At this stage of the case, and given the case’s trajectory, it seems Debtor should possess a reasonably accurate estimate of the administrative claims in this case which would allow priority and unsecured creditors to determine the amount of any potential distribution, if any. Currently, the Motion’s treatment of the distribution of the sales proceeds is vague; the Motion also confusingly refers to Nation’s retaining a security interest in the cash component of the purchase amount, for reasons that are very unclear.

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By

1:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Todd L Turoci

Chapter 11

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #23.00 Motion by Debtor to Assume, Assign, and Establish Cure Amounts For Certain Executory Contracts And Unexpired Leases

Also # 21 & 22 EH

Docket 354

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

1:00 PM

6:18-10155

Jose De Jesus Hernandez

Chapter 11 #24.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3095 Ocelot Circle, Corona, CA 92882

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

From: Advanced from 2:00 calendar EH

Docket 71

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶ 2,3, and 12.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By

Eric Bensamochan

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Austin P Nagel

2:00 PM

6:16-19993

B & B Family, Incorporated

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01116 Forte v. B & B Family, Incorporated

#25.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01116. Complaint by Patricia Forte against B & B Family, Incorporated.

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/31/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi

Defendant(s):

B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci

Plaintiff(s):

Patricia Forte Represented By

D Edward Hays Laila Masud

2:00 PM

6:17-15717

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization From: 6/6/18

Docket 113

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/31/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By

David Lozano

Movant(s):

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By

David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano

2:00 PM

6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11 #27.00 CONT Motion to Appoint Chapter 11 Trustee From: 6/26/18

Docket 173

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By

Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #28.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18, 7/10/18 EH

Docket 48

* VACATED * REASON: ADVANCED TO 1:00 PM CALENDAR

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By

Eric Bensamochan

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Austin P Nagel

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#32.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01094. Complaint by Markus Anthony Boyd against U.S. BANK, SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC, Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 2 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 3 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 4 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 5 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 6 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 7 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint) Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Gebelt, Nicholas)

From: 6/26/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#33.00 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss The Amended Adversary Complaint Under Fed.

R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) and Fed. R. Bank. P. EH

Docket 11

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 7/25/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Movant(s):

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #1.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 10 by Claimant Midland Funding LLC Also #2 - #8

Docket 87

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 12, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #10-1 (the "Objection") of Midland Funding LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtor and original creditor took place on November 17, 2009, and that the Claimant charged off the account on August 11, 2009. Assuming the prima facie validity of the Claim, the last transaction date indicates that the statute of limitations had not lapsed

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

as of the Petition Date. To controvert the Claim’s allegation regarding the last transaction date, the Trustee "must produce evidence, which, if believed, would refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim’s legal sufficiency." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040. To meet this burden, the Trustee has provided a declaration of the Debtors by which they assert under penalty of perjury that no payments have been made for four years. The evidence is scant. However, absent opposition from the Claimant, the evidence controverts an essential allegation of the Claim regarding the last transaction date.

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 10 must shift to Claimant.

Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 10 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #2.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 1 by Claimant American InfoSource LP as agent for Midland Funding LLC

Also #1 - #8 EH

Docket 88

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 12, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #1-1 (the "Objection") of American InfoSource LP as agent for Midland Funding LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Debtor and original creditor took place on November 17, 2009. Assuming the prima facie validity of the Claim, the last transaction date indicates that the statute of limitations had not lapsed as of the Petition Date. To controvert the Claim’s allegation regarding the last transaction date, the Trustee "must produce evidence, which, if believed, would refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim’s legal sufficiency." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040. To meet this burden, the Trustee has provided a declaration of the Debtors by which they assert under penalty of perjury that no payments have been made for four years. The evidence is scant. However, absent opposition from the Claimant, the evidence controverts an essential allegation of the Claim regarding the last transaction date.

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 1 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 1 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #3.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 7 by Claimant Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC

Also #1 - #8 EH

Docket 89

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 12, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #7-2 (the "Objection") of Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtor and original creditor took place on November 17, 2009. Assuming the prima facie validity of the Claim, the last transaction date indicates that the statute of

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

limitations had not lapsed as of the Petition Date. To controvert the Claim’s allegation regarding the last transaction date, the Trustee "must produce evidence, which, if believed, would refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim’s legal sufficiency." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040. To meet this burden, the Trustee has provided a declaration of the Debtors by which they assert under penalty of perjury that no payments have been made for four years. The evidence is scant. However, absent opposition from the Claimant, the evidence controverts an essential allegation of the Claim regarding the last transaction date. As a separate issue, the Trustee asserts that the Claim fails to establish an unbroken chain of title. The Claim indicates that Wells Fargo was the original creditor and then that the claim was transferred from National Credit Adjusters, LLC ("National") to Claimant. However, there is no documentation establishing the transfer of the rights in the claim from Wells Fargo to National. The objection is well-taken. See In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897, 920 (9th Cir.

BAP 2011).

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 7-2 must shift to Claimant.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 7-2 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #4.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 3 by Claimant Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC

Also #1 - #8 EH

Docket 96

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 14, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #3-1 (the "Objection") of Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 3 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 3 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 6 by Claimant Collecto US Asset Managemnt, INC; Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC Assignee

Also #1 - #8 EH_

Docket 98

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 14, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #6-2 (the "Objection") of Collecto US Management Inc; Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC Assignee ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Debtor and original creditor is unavailable. The Trustee has provided a declaration of the Debtors by which they assert under penalty of perjury that no payments have been made for four years. The evidence is scant. However, absent opposition from the Claimant, and given that the Claim fails to indicate the last transaction date, the evidence controverts an essential allegation of the Claim regarding the last transaction date.

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 6-2 must shift to Claimant.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 6-2 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 8 by Claimant Jefferson Capital Systems LLC

Also #1 - #8 EH

Docket 101

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 14, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #8-2 (the "Objection") of Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtor and original creditor is "N/A." The Trustee has provided a declaration of the Debtors by which they assert under penalty of perjury that no payments have been

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

made for four years. The evidence is scant. However, absent opposition from the Claimant, and given that the Claim fails to indicate the last transaction date, the evidence controverts an essential allegation of the Claim regarding the last transaction date. As a separate issue, the Trustee asserts that the Claim fails to establish an unbroken chain of title. The Claim indicates that Wells Fargo was the original creditor and then that the claim was transferred from RJM Acquisitions, LLC ("RJM") to Claimant. However, there is no documentation establishing the transfer of the rights in the claim from Wells Fargo to RJM. The objection is well-taken. See In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897, 920 (9th Cir. BAP 2011).

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 8-2 must shift to Claimant.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 8-2 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Leonard J Cravens

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 9 by Claimant LVNV Funding LLC Also #1 - #8

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 14, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #9-1 (the "Objection") of LVNV Funding, LLC its successors and assigns as assignee of Arrow Financial Services, LLC ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

Here, the Claimant’s documentation indicates that the last transaction between the Debtor and original creditor was June 29, 2009, which exceeds the four year statute of limitations. As a separate issue, the Trustee asserts that the Claim fails to establish an

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

unbroken chain of title. The Claim indicates that GE was the original creditor. At some point, the Claim was transferred to Claimant. However, there is no documentation establishing the transfer of the rights in the claim from GE to Claimant. The objection is well-taken. See In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897, 920 (9th Cir. BAP 2011).

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 9-1 must shift to Claimant.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 9-1 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

11:00 AM

6:13-27788

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant Department Stores National Bank/Macys

Also #1 - #7 EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2013 ("Petition Date"), Porfirio and Maria Castro (collectively, "Debtors") filed for chapter 13 relief. On August 16, 2017, the case was converted to a case under chapter 7. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On June 14, 2018, Trustee filed Objection to Claim #2-1 (the "Objection") of Department Stores National Bank/Macys ("Claimant").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Trustee asserts that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

App. 2004).

11:00 AM

CONT...

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 2 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to disallow Claim No. 2 as time barred. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Maria Lopez Castro Represented By Leonard J Cravens

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Porfirio Macias Castro and Maria Lopez Castro

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-17350

Dean L. Springer, Sr. and Tami Jo Springer

Chapter 7 #9.00 CONT Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order

From: 8/30/17, 9/20/17, 11/1/17, 12/13/17, 2/7/18, 2/28/18, 3/28/18, 5/9/18, 6/6/18, 6/27/18

Docket 148

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/23/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Dean L. Springer Sr. Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Tami Jo Springer Pro Se

Movant(s):

Hilder & Associates Represented By

Lei Lei Wang Ekvall

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Richard A Marshack Sarah Cate Hays

D Edward Hays Laila Masud

11:00 AM

6:15-21418

James Lloyd Walker

Chapter 7 #10.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 4/11/18, 5/16/18

Docket 102

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James Lloyd Walker Pro Se

Movant(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta Caroline Djang

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta Caroline Djang

11:00 AM

6:16-20966

Benjamin Tameifuna and Melenaite L Tameifuna

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 2,807.27 Trustee Expenses: $ 102.72

The application for compensation is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPERANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Benjamin Tameifuna Represented By Joshua L Sternberg

Joint Debtor(s):

Melenaite L Tameifuna Represented By Joshua L Sternberg

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-10720

Hiep Huu Phan

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 76

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The application for compensation of the Trustee and his Counsel have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees:	$ 20,000
Trustee Expenses:	$ 93.31
Counsel Fees:	$16,840
Counsel Expenses:	$957.94

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and professionals may submit on the tentative.

APPERANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Hiep Huu Phan Represented By Toby T Tran

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

11:00 AM

6:18-10696

Audrey Beck

Chapter 7 #13.00 Motion Of United States Trustee To Disgorge Fees And Impose Damages And Fines Against Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Martin Rojas

Also # 14 EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

On 01/30/2018 ("Petition Date"), Audrey Beck ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 7 relief. On April 6, 2018, the case was dismissed due to the Debtor’s failure to appear at the 341(a) meeting of creditors.

On April 17, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion to reopen her case indicating that she did not appear at the meeting of creditors because her attorney advised her not to appear.

On April 23, 2018, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause why Martin Rojas ("BPP") should not be sanctioned for improperly providing legal advice to the Debtor ("OSC"). The OSC was mailed but returned as undeliverable. An order reopening the case and vacating dismissal was entered on June 4, 2018.

On June 5, 2015, the Court issued an Order Continuing the OSC and resetting deadlines for a response by the BPP.

On June 29, 2018, the Office of United States Trustee ("UST") filed its Motion Of United States Trustee To Disgorge Fees And Impose Damages And Fines Against Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Martin Rojas ("Motion").

DISCUSSION

The BPP is an enjoined petition preparer previously adjudicated to be in contempt of court orders. Based on the BPP’s pattern of egregious conduct as outlined

11:00 AM

CONT...

Audrey Beck

Chapter 7

in the Motion, the UST requests the BPP be ordered to pay statutory damages of

$2,000, and fines directly to the UST in the sum of $19,000.

The UST has provided evidence that the BPP received $900 to prepare the Debtor’s bankruptcy documents, $100 to recover a payment to a prior petition preparer named John Davy, and $400 for preparation of a living trust. The Beck Declaration details the legal advice provided by the BPP, that he held himself out to Debtor as an attorney, and the fact that he advised her not to attend the meeting of creditors. Separately, the Mehra Declaration details orders entered in other bankruptcy cases in which the BPP has been enjoined from providing bankruptcy petition preparer services and holding him in contempt for his failure to comply with prior orders.

On the merits, the UST has provided evidence to support a conclusion that Martin Rojas is a bankruptcy petition preparer pursuant to § 110. The evidence further supports a finding that the BPP failed to sign bankruptcy documents, failed to provide his identifying number, that he provided legal advice to the Debtor, and that he failed to disclose the fees he received.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the moving papers, the evidence submitted by the UST, and the failure of the BPP to file opposition which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court’s tentative ruling is to GRANT the UST’s Motion in its entirety, ordering the BPP to disgorge $1,000 to the Debtor, to pay statutory damages of $2,000 to the Debtor, and to pay fines directly to the UST in the sum of $19,000.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Audrey Beck Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Audrey Beck

Chapter 7

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq Mohammad Tehrani

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-10696

Audrey Beck

Chapter 7 #14.00 CONT OSC why Martin Rojas should not be sanctioned for improperly providing legal advice

From: 5/30/18 Also # 13

Docket 16

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Audrey Beck Pro Se

Movant(s):

Audrey Beck Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by

A. Cisneros against OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC CORPORATION, a California corporation, UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/22/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Misty Perry Isaacson

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01309 Cisneros v. DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN

#16.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01309. Complaint by

A. Cisneros against DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential Transfer (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#17.00 Motion For Summary Judgment Also # 18

Docket 54

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 18, 2013, Nabeel Slaieh ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. On March 24, 2014, W E Jon Albrecht ("Plaintiff") filed the instant complaint to determine dischargeability of debt pursuant to § 523(a)(6). On June 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed his Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion"). On July 3, 2018, the Debtor filed his opposition to the Motion ("Opposition"). On the same date, the Debtor filed a substitution of attorney by which the Debtor indicated his intent to represent himself in propria persona going forward.

As a threshold matter, the Court must address the manner in which the Opposition was filed. Prior to the filing of the Substitution of Attorney Form, the Debtor was represented by George Saba ("Saba"). However, per the State Bar of California website, Mr. Saba has not been eligible to practice law in California since December 2017. Pursuant to the Court’s manual, Section 3.1(c) and Section 3.2(b), attorneys admitted to practice in the Central District of California, currently in good standing, are eligible to register as CM/ECF users with the rights to log in and file documents. Here, the Debtor, acting in pro per, is not eligible to file documents using CM/ECF and it was improper for Mr. Saba to use the CM/ECF system to improperly file a document for a party who he is no longer representing and who he is no longer able to represent given his ineligibility to practice law. Further, Section 3.2(d)(1) prohibits a registered user from knowingly permitting or causing to permit his or her

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

login and password to be utilized by anyone. Here, Mr. Saba has violated the Court’s rules regarding CM/ECF filing. Based on the improper filing of the Opposition, the Court is inclined to issue an OSC why Mr. Saba’s CM/ECF rights should not be suspended or cancelled pursuant to Section 3.2(d)(3) of the Court Manual.

Based on the foregoing, the Court strikes the Opposition as improperly filed. A reply to the Opposition was filed on July 11, 2018 ("Reply"), as well as separately filed objections to the Declaration of Defendant in support of the Opposition (Docket No. 172).

DISCUSSION

Summary Judgment

A court may grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. FRBP 7056 (incorporating FRCP 56). In determining whether to grant a motion for summary judgment, courts must view the record and all inferences drawn from it in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Trunk v. City of San Diego, 629 F.3d 1099, 1105 (9th Cir.2011).

Judicial Notice

In support of the Motion, Plaintiff requests that this Court take judicial notice of (1) The Certified Copy of Complaint for Malicious Prosecution, RJN, Ex. 1, (2) the Certified Copy of Summons filed January 25, 2011, RJN, Ex. 2, (3) the Certified Copy of Proof of Service of Summons, RJN, Ex. 3, and (4) the Copy of Judgment, RJN, Ex. 4. The Court takes judicial notice of these filings.

Nondischargeability under § 523(a)(6)

Section 523(a)(6) excepts from discharge debts arising from a debtor's willful

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

and malicious injury to another person. Barboza v. New Form, Inc. (In re Barboza), 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir.2008). The willful and malice requirements must be analyzed separately, Carillo v. Su (In re Su), 290 F.3d 1140, 1146–47 (2002), and the court must determine that both have been met, Ormsby v. First Am. Title Co. of Nev. (In re Ormsby), 591 F.3d 1199, 1206 (9th Cir. 2010).

"A ‘willful’ injury is a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Barboza, 545 F.3d at 706, quoting Kawaauhau

v. Geiger, 523 U .S. 57, 61 (1998). To satisfy the willfulness requirement, it must be shown that the debtor either had "a subjective intent to harm or a subjective belief that harm is substantially certain." Su, 290 F.3d at 1144. When determining the debtor's intent under § 523(a)(6), there is a presumption that the debtor knows the natural consequences of his actions. Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206.

"A malicious injury involves ‘(1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse.’ " Su, 290 F.3d at 1146–47, quoting Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich), 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir.2001). "Within the plain meaning of this definition, it is the wrongful act that must be committed intentionally rather than the injury itself." Jett v. Sicroff (In re Sicroff), 401 F.3d 1101, 1106 (9th Cir.2005), citing Murray v. Bammer (In re Bammer), 131 F.3d 788, 791 (9th Cir.1997)("This four-part definition does not require a showing of biblical malice, i.e., personal hatred, spite, or ill will. Nor does it require a showing of an intent to injure, but rather it requires only an intentional act which causes injury."). "Malice may be inferred based on the nature of the wrongful act." Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206, citing Transamerica Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Littleton (In re Littleton), 942 F.2d 551, 554 (9th Cir.1991)(determining that, in the case of conversion, malice may be inferred).

In the instant action, the Plaintiff obtained a judgment ("Judgment) in State Court as against the Defendant based on a complaint for malicious prosecution (the "State Action"). The Plaintiff now moves under a theory of collateral estoppel for summary judgment finding that the Judgment is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6).

Collateral Estoppel

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

A bankruptcy court may grant summary judgment based on the issue

Chapter 7

preclusive effect of an existing state court judgment. See Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001). In doing so, it must apply the forum state's issue preclusion law. Id. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Here, California preclusion law applies.

In California, issue preclusion bars relitigation of an issue when: 1) the issue sought to be precluded is identical to that decided in a prior proceeding; 2) the issue was actually litigated in the prior proceeding; 3) the issue was necessarily decided in the prior proceeding; and 4) the decision in the prior proceeding is final and on the merits. Lucido v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 335, 341 (1990). Additionally, in California, issue preclusion may only be applied if it furthers underlying public policies. See id. at 343.

The party asserting issue preclusion bears the burden of establishing these requirements. Id. at 341. To do so, "[the] party must produce a record sufficient to reveal the controlling facts and pinpoint the exact issues litigated in the prior action. Any reasonable doubt as to what was decided by a prior judgment should be resolved against allowing [issue preclusive] effect." Kelly v. Okoye (In re Kelly), 182 B.R. 255, 258 (9th Cir.BAP1995), aff'd, 100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir.1996).

Here, the Plaintiff obtained a Judgment on a malicious prosecution action under California law. The Court now turns to whether ‘malicious prosecution’ satisfies the requirements for collateral estoppel under California law.

Application of law to cause of action for malicious prosecution

In California, the common law tort of malicious prosecution provides a remedy for individuals subjected to maliciously instituted criminal and civil proceedings. In re Arden, 2015 WL 4068962, at *9 (9th Cir. BAP 2015)(citing Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert Oliker, 47 Cal.3d 863, 871–72 (1989)). To establish a cause of action for malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding, the plaintiff must show "that the prior action (1) was commenced [or continued] by or at the direction of the defendant and was pursued to a legal termination in his [or her], plaintiff's, favor;

(2) was brought without probable cause; and (3) was initiated [or continued] with

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

malice." Id., quoting Bertero v. Nat'l Gen. Corp., 13 Cal.3d 43, 50 (1974)(internal quotation marks omitted).

In Arden, the BAP specifically considered whether the tort of malicious prosecution satisfies both the willful and malicious prongs of § 523(a)(6):

"The ‘malice’ element of the malicious prosecution tort relates to the subjective intent or purpose with which the defendant acted in initiating the prior action." Estate of C. Delores Tucker v. Interscope Records, Inc., 515 F.3d 1019, 1030 (9th Cir.2008) ("Tucker"), quoting Sheldon Appel Co., 47 Cal.3d at 874 (internal quotation marks omitted). However, the malice required in malicious prosecution "is not limited to actual hostility or ill will toward [the] plaintiff but exists when the proceedings are instituted primarily for an improper purpose." Albertson v. Raboff, 46 Cal.2d 375, 383 (Cal.1956). See also Tucker, 515 F.3d at 1030, quoting Sierra Club Found. v. Graham, 72 Cal.App. 4th 1135, 1147 (1999)("Sierra Club ").

The California Supreme Court has explained:

he principal situations in which the civil proceedings are initiated for an improper purpose are those in which (1) the person instituting them does not believe that his claim may be held valid; (2) the proceedings are begun primarily because of hostility or ill will; (3) the proceedings are initiated solely for the purpose of depriving the person against whom they are instituted of a beneficial use of his property; [or] (4) the proceedings are initiated for the purpose of forcing a settlement which has no relation to the merits of the claim.

Albertson, 46 Cal.2d at 383, quoting Rest., Torts § 676. Accordingly, in a malicious prosecution action, the proof may or may not establish a willful intent to injure on the part of the defendant.

Arden at *9-10.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

As underscored in Arden, willfulness is not a separate and distinct element of

Chapter 7

the tort of malicious prosecution, though willfulness may be inferred from the debtor's intent in commencing or continuing litigation. Moreover, " ‘[m]erely because a tort is classified as intentional does not mean that any injury caused by the tortfeasor is willful.’ " Ditto v. McCurdy, 510 F.3d 1070, 1078 (9th Cir.2007), quoting Miller v.

J.D. Abrams Inc. (In re Miller), 156 F.3d 598, 604 (5th Cir.1998). Here, the Judgment obtained against Defendant/Debtor was a default judgment and although the BAP found that ‘malicious prosecution’ likely satisfies the malice requirement under § 523(a)(6), it also specifically found that the ‘willfulness’ element was not necessarily decided by the state court because ‘willfullness’ is not required to enter judgment on a malicious prosecution cause of action. In Arden, the jury instructions indicated that the specific question of intent to injure was not posed to the jury. As such, the willfulness requirement was not necessarily decided or actually litigated by the state court. Similarly, the Judgment obtained by Plaintiff Albrecht did not require the State Court to consider, let alone determine whether Defendant Slaieh intended injury to Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s Motion assumes the issue of intent was decided by the State Court. However, absent authority to distinguish the Arden case, whose reasoning this Court adopts as its own, the Motion does not satisfy the requirements for collateral estoppel because the Judgment is insufficient to establish the elements required under

§ 523(a)(6). It is possible that the issue of willfulness is subsumed by the state court’s determination that punitive damages were appropriate. However, such a theory must be addressed with reference to the Ninth Circuit BAP’s decision in In re Plyam that a California state court punitive damage award, standing alone, does not preclude relitigation of § 523(a)(6)'s "willful" intent requirement. In re Sangha, 678 F. App'x 561, 562 (9th Cir. 2017); Plyam v. Precision Development, LLC (In re Plyam), 530

B.R. 456, 463–65 (9th Cir. BAP 2015) (holding that "under California law, the general definition of malice in fact encompasses less reprehensible states of mind" than § 523(a)(6)'s "willful" intent requirement).

Finally, although the Court has stricken the Opposition as improperly filed, the Court shall also address the one cognizable legal issue raised in the Opposition – namely, that the State Action Complaint was not personally served on him. As to this issue, the Court agrees with the Plaintiff that the Defendant’s declaration fails to address whether and when he learned of the State Action. The declaration of Defendant is conspicuously silent on these facts and as such determined to be not credible on the issue of lack of service.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for additional briefing regarding the issue of "willfulness".

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By George A Saba

Defendant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice

Movant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice

Plaintiff(s):

W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

D Edward Hays David Wood Matthew Grimshaw

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#18.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01081. Complaint by

W.E. Jon Albrecht against Nabeel Slaieh. willful and malicious injury))

HOLDING DATE

From: 10/19/16, 12/14/16, 2/15/17, 3/29/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17, 4/25/18

Also # 17 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By George A Saba

Defendant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice

Plaintiff(s):

W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

D Edward Hays

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

David Wood Matthew Grimshaw

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al

#19.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Amended Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason; 68- Dischargeability - 523(a)(6) Willful and Malicious Injury

From: 11/2/16, 1/4/17, 3/1/17, 3/8/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/13/17, 1/24/18, 3/7/18, 5/9/18, 5/30/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Joint Debtor(s):

Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Plaintiff(s):

Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#20.00 CONT Motion for Summary Judgment Against Defendant Carolina Villalobos Navarro

From: 4/25/18, 5/16/18 Also #21 - #22

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

4/25/18

BACKGROUND

On April 12, 2016, Jose Hernandez ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 7, 2016, the Chapter 7 Trustee ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Carolina Navarro ("Defendant") seeking the avoidance and recovery of a fraudulent transfer.

After default was entered against Defendant, on October 14, 2016, the parties stipulated to set aside default, and, that same day, Defendant filed her answer. On March 1, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 4, 2018, Defendant filed her opposition.

Plaintiff alleges that on July 21, 2014, Debtor transferred certain real property located at 3510 Duffy St., San Bernardino, CA 92407 to Defendant for no consideration and that Debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. Defendant received a Chapter 7 discharge on January 26, 2018.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

DISCUSSION

Violation of Discharge Injunction

As a preliminary matter, Defendant argues that because she obtained her own discharge in January, the continuation of this proceeding violates her discharge injunction. Specifically, Defendant argues that her discharge extinguishes her personal liability and that Trustee’s complaint seeks avoidance of the transfer and recovery of the property or its value. Defendant’s opposition states:

Notwithstanding his heightened knowledge of the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and bankruptcy jurisprudence, the Trustee has pursued the same claims and remedies against Defendant after her discharge was granted, relieving her of any personal liability on account of the Trustee’s alleged claims and barring the Trustee from obtaining relief in this case. For example, the Trustee seeks judgment on his Fifth Claim, which as pled in the Complaint, alleges that "Plaintiff is entitled to recovery the Subject Property or its value from the Defendant Pursuant to § 550(a)."
[Dkt. No. 46, pg. 12-13].

Defendant’s argument is misleading and lacks merit. Regardless of the relief requested in the complaint, which was filed before Defendant obtained a discharge, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment has dropped the reference to "or its value" and only seeks recovery of the subject property. Nothing in the motion for summary judgment seeks to enforce a personal liability of the Defendant. Therefore, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument.
Motion for Summary Judgment

Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7
BANKR. P. 7056).

The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324; see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(e). The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.

If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).

A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.

Plaintiff requests summary judgment on the second claim for relief (avoidance of constructively fraudulent transfer) and the fifth claim for relief (recovery of avoided transfer). 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) states, in pertinent part:

(a)(1) The trustee may avoid any transfer (including any transfer to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) of an interest of the debtor in property, or any obligation (including any obligation to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) incurred by the debtor, that was made or incurred on or within 2 years before the date of the filing of the petition, if the debtor voluntarily or involuntarily --

(B)(i) received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for such transfer or obligation; and

(ii)(I) was insolvent on the date that such transfer was made or such obligation was incurred, or became insolvent as a result of such
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez
transfer or obligation

Chapter 7

Defendant does not dispute that there was a transfer of an interest of property within 2 years before the petition date. Defendant does, however, dispute the satisfaction of the other two elements, arguing that Defendant received reasonably equivalent value and was not rendered insolvent by the subject transfer. See generally In re Fruehauf Trailer Corp., 444 F.3d 203, 210 (3rd Cir. 2006); In re Southern Textile Knitters, 65 Fed. Appx. 426, 436 (4th Cir. 2003) (outlining elements of § 548(a)(1)(B) action).

Regarding the requirement that reasonably equivalent value have been provided, Plaintiff asserts that the grant deed reflects that the transfer was a "bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return." In her opposition, Defendant argues that the language of the grant deed is inaccurate, and that she offered value in a variety of ways. Specifically, Defendant contends that she was a co-signer for the refinancing and "also provided consideration by contributing her wages to pay for household expenses and by providing domestic labor including cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, and running the parties’ household." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 17, lines 7-9]. With regard to the language on the grant deed, Defendant states that:

The Grant Deed was not prepared by Debtor or Defendant. Debtor and Defendant correctly advised the loan officer who handled the refinancing that Defendant was not paying cash to Debtor for her one-half interest. For this reason, Debtor and Defendant believe the loan officer or escrow agent who prepared the Grant Deed noted on the document that the Transfer was a gift.
[Dkt. No. 46, pg. 5, lines 1-5].

In the reply, Plaintiff contends that "[a]fter first stating that it was a gift and nothing was received, the Debtor and Defendant should be estopped from now claiming it was not a gift and reasonably equivalent value was provided for the Subject Transfer." [Dkt. No. 51, pg. 4, lines 13-15].

The Court concludes that the parol evidence rule applies here to preclude the consideration of evidence which contradicts the plain and unambiguous language of the deed. See generally In re Khalil, 2014 WL 1725811 at *6-11 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2014) (collecting cases providing comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule in the context of grant deeds deed). As was noted in Khalil:
If there is no ambiguity on the face of the document, and no reference to
2:00 PM
CONT... Jose Antonio Hernandez Chapter 7
information or terms in the recorded document or from the circumstances of
the conveyance that would lead a bona fide purchaser to inquire as to the intent and meaning of the instrument, then the bona fide purchaser is entitled to rely on the written record and is not charged with or bound by unstated meanings or by secret or collateral agreements that add to or alter the written record.

Id. at *10. While the above quotation is in the context of ownership interests in real property, rather than the nature of consideration, or lack thereof, in connection with a grant deed, the same underlying principle is applicable: "third parties, including the trustee and the estate’s creditors, must be able to rely on the terms of recorded deed." Id. at *11. See also id. at *10 ("As a general rule, when any ambiguity is not evident from the face of the instrument (i.e., a "latent" ambiguity), the deed must be construed solely from an analysis of the plain meaning of the document itself, and extrinsic evidence is not admissible."); Laux v. Freed, 53 Cal. 2d. 512, 523 (Cal. 1960) ("[I]f the language of a deed is plain, certain and unambiguous, neither parol evidence nor surrounding facts and circumstances will be considered to add to, detract from, or vary its terms.").

Regarding the insolvency requirement, Plaintiff first argues that given the absence of reasonably equivalent value, Debtor’s insolvency as a result of the transfer should be assumed; Plaintiff cites United States v. Mazzeo, 245 B.R. 435, 441 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). The Court declines to make such a presumption. The case cited by Plaintiff, and the related case law, deals with fraudulent transfer provisions under New York state law. See, e.g., Kim v. Ji Sung Yoo, 2017 WL 4382078 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (noting presumption and collecting cases). No such burden shifting framework, however, exists under the Bankruptcy Code. See 5 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 548.11[2] (16th ed. 2017) ("Under state law and the UFTA (and presumably the UVTA), a well- recognized exception permits the court to infer a proscribed financial state once the plaintiff has shown a lack of fair consideration or a lack of reasonably equivalent value. This shift should not apply to cases brought under section 548.") (footnotes omitted); see also In re Galbreath, 286 B.R. 185, 197 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2002) ("The burden for proving constructive fraud falls on the trustee who must show by a preponderance of the evidence that all requirements set out in § 548(a)(1)(B) have been met.")

Plaintiff next argues that Debtor’s insolvency can be established through a review of the schedules. Essentially, Plaintiff argues that the schedules indicate that Debtor was insolvent as of the petition date, and that the Court can work backwards to conclude that Debtor was insolvent on the date of the transfer. As one bankruptcy court has stated:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Since insolvency at a given point in time is often difficult to demonstrate by direct proof, courts permit the trustee to show that the debtor was insolvent at one point in time and then prove that the same condition existed at the time of the subject transfer. This method of proof has been labeled "retrojection," but

Chapter 7
it applies equally to situations in which the trustee starts at a point in time prior to the transfer. When the trustee chooses to use this method of proof it is essential that the trustee be able to show the absence of any substantial or radical changes in the assets or liabilities of the bankruptcy between the retrojection dates.

In re R. Purbeck & Assocs., Ltd., 27 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1983) (footnotes and quotation omitted). Plaintiff argues that the schedules reflect that Debtor had no meaningful unexempt assets as of the petition date while much of Debtor’s unsecured debt was identified as having been incurred prior to the date of the transfer.
Furthermore, Debtor’s statement of financial affairs does not disclose any significant transfers of property between the date of the subject transfer and the petition date.

In Defendant’s opposition, she appears to contend that Debtor’s outstanding debt on the date of the subject transfer was $210,282 and that Debtor’s assets were valued at approximately $224,000. The Court notes that these assertions do not demonstrate solvency – they demonstrate insolvency as that term is defined in the Code. 11 U.S.C.
§ 101(32)(A)(ii) exempts from the solvency requirement property which may be exempt under § 522. The assets listed in Debtor’s schedules, and in Defendant’s opposition, all appear to be assets capable of being exempted under § 522, thereby rendering Defendant statutorily insolvent. Even ignoring that fact, however, Defendant’s opposition indicates that Debtor had $53,186 in equity in the property; transferring a 50% interest in the property would have rendered Debtor insolvent even before removing property which can be exempted. As a result, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has demonstrated there is no genuine dispute regarding Debtor’s insolvency on the date of the subject transfer.
Recovery

Plaintiff also seeks recovery of the subject property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550. 11
U.S.C. § 550(a)(1) states:
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, to the extent that a transfer is avoided under section 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 553(b), or 724(a) of this title,
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez
the trustee may recover, for the benefit of the estate, the property transferred, or, if the court so orders, the value of such property, from –
1. the initial transferee of such transfer or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Defendant opposes the requested recovery, although the legal basis for the opposition is less than clear. Defendant argues that "annulment of the Transfer would have the effect of returning the Property to a single ownership since Debtor was the sole owner. Therefore, recovery of the Transfer is unnecessary and provides no benefit to the estate." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 18, lines 15-17]. The Court’s interpretation of the Plaintiff’s request is that Plaintiff is requesting an order indicating that the Property has retained to single ownership (the bankruptcy estate). Therefore, it does not appear there is really any legal dispute here, semantical differences aside.
Withdrawal of Admissions

In light of the foregoing, the Court is inclined to deny Defendant’s motion to withdraw admissions as moot. The Court need not rely on admissions by default in resolving the instant motion for summary judgment.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion for summary judgment, avoiding the transfer as constructively fraudulent and permitting Trustee’s recovery of such transfer. Defendant’s motion to withdrawn admissions is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#21.00 CONT Motion to Withdraw Alleged Admissions To Trustees Requests For Admission

From: 4/25/18, 5/16/18 Also #20 - # 22

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Frank X Ruggier

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint to Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer

From: 9/7/16, 11/9/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/27/17, 11/29/17, 1/10/18, 4/25/18, 5/16/18

Also #20 - #21

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier

2:00 PM

6:16-20260

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al

#23.00 CONT Motion for Default Judgment From: 5/30/18

Also # 24 EH

Docket 46

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/29/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

5/30/18

BACKGROUND

On November 18, 2016, Javier & Carmen Lopez (collectively "Debtors"; individually, "Javier" and "Carmen") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On March 6, 2017, Amarillo College of Hairdressing ("Plaintiff") filed a non-dischargeability complaint against Javier pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4), and (a)(6). On July 12, 2017, the clerk entered default against Javier.

On October 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On November 7, 2017, Debtors filed their opposition. On November 13, 2017, the Court granted the motion, and, on December 11, 2017, Plaintiff amended its complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On February 26, 2018, the clerk entered default against Carmen.

On April 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. According to Plaintiff,

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Javier, while employed as the Dean of Education at Plaintiff’s Palm Desert campus, received, through direct deposit, twice his agreed upon salary for a period of one year. Plaintiff asserts that the direct deposit authorization form contained a provision which granted Plaintiff the right to correct any erroneous overpayments of funds. After alerting Javier of the erroneous double payment, Javier refused to voluntarily reimburse Plaintiff for the overpayment. Plaintiff also asserts that Javier was aware of the erroneous double payment during the time when the double payments were made.

On January 2, 2014, Plaintiff filed a state court complaint against Javier for breach of contract, fraud, and conversion. On September 15, 2015, the state court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to all causes of action, and entered judgment in the amount of $49,603.08.

DISCUSSION

Entry of Default
FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
Motion for Default Judgment
1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Javier Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
    1. Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
      
      Here, Plaintiff served Debtors at the address listed on their bankruptcy schedules and served Debtor’s attorney via ECF. Therefore, service is proper.
2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim

Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").

Here, the complaint includes three causes of action, all related to non-dischargeability: (1) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A); (2) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4); and (3) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)

The above provisions read, in pertinent part:
1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of creditor, to the extent obtained by –

Chapter 13
1. false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;

(4) for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, or larceny;

(6) for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity;

The Court notes that it is, at best, unclear whether any of the three provisions are applicable to the facts here. For example, in In re Sterling, the bankruptcy court analyzed whether an employee’s retention of overtime pay at double the contractual rate satisfied the either 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) or 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). 479 B.R. 444 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2012). Respecting 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A), the court first noted that the provision can apply to "misleading omissions" or "a scheme to deprive or cheat another of property or a legal right." Id. at 449. The bankruptcy court noted, however, that omission or silence only establishes the requisite intent if the debtor had an affirmative duty to disclose. Id. (applying Michigan law and the silent fraud doctrine). After noting that the plaintiff had not identified any contractual duty to disclose, the bankruptcy court noted that: "[a] duty to disclose may also arise in equity," but ultimately concluded the following:

The present case does not present any circumstances that would give rise to such an equitable duty. To the contrary, Plaintiff was in a position of control and had at least equal if not superior knowledge, gained from repeated, but unavailing attempts to correct the problem. Plaintiff, as Defendant’s employer, had access to the payroll information and, with the exercise of reasonable diligence, could have discovered the continuing overpayments at any time.

Id. at 450 (also questioning whether plaintiff’s reliance on defendant’s silence was justifiable because the information was in the control of plaintiff).

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Here, neither the complaint nor the motion for default judgment include any allegation that Javier affirmatively misled Plaintiff, nor do they contain any basis upon which the Court could conclude that Javier had a contractual or an equitable duty to disclose the overpayments to Plaintiff. Therefore, the Court requires further briefing if Plaintiff wishes to establish that the debt is non-dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) (2)(A).

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) contains three different exceptions to dischargeability: (1) fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity; (2) larceny; and (3) embezzlement. Regarding fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, the elements are:

(1) the existence of an express trust; (2) the debt was caused by fraud or defalcation; and (3) the debtor acted as a fiduciary to the creditor at the time the debt was created. See, e.g., In re Niles, 106 F.3d 1456, 1459 (9th Cir. 1997). Clearly Plaintiff has not satisfied the standard for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity because, among other things, Javier was not acting in a fiduciary capacity as to his salary and his salary was certainly not the corpus express trust. See, e.g., Matter of Cantrell, 88 F.3d 344, 347 (5th Cir. 1996) ("The court also correctly opined that, in the absence of an express trust and a recognizable corpus, 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) is inapplicable.").

Plaintiff also does not appear to have satisfied the standard for larceny or embezzlement. "Larceny is the fraudulent and wrongful taking and carrying away of the property of another with intent to convert the property to the taker’s use without the consent of the owner." 4 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 523.10[2] (16th ed. 2009). Here, it appears doubtful that Javier could be considered to have "taken" the excess salary payments which Plaintiff caused to be directly deposited in Javier’s bank account. Embezzlement, on the other hand, contains three elements: "(1) property rightfully in the possession of a nonowner; (2) nonowner’s appropriation of the property to a use other than which it was entrusted; and (3) circumstances indicating fraud." In re Littleton, 942 F.2d 551, 555 (9th Cir. 1991). While there may be a colorable argument that embezzlement has occurred in this case, such an argument has not been detailed in the complaint or the motion for default judgment. Therefore, the Court requires further briefing if Plaintiff wishes to establish that the debt is non- dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4).

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Regarding § 523(a)(6) the elements are: "(1) willful conduct, (2) malice, and (3) causation." See, e.g., In re Apte, 180 B.R. 223, 230 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1995). Here, Plaintiff’s complaint simply recites the legal standard, notes that the state court awarded a judgment based, in part, on fraud, and Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment contains the material state court pleadings as an attachment. The Court deems the allegations in the complaint to be insufficient to establish non- dischargeability under § 523(a)(6). See In re Sterling, 479 B.R. 444, 452-455 (Bankr.

E.D. Mich. 2012) (detailing § 523(a)(6) analysis in context of retention of salary overpayment). Therefore, the Court requires further briefing if Plaintiff wishes to establish that the debt is non-dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6).

Finally, the Court notes that it appears Plaintiff has assumed that the use of issue preclusion is appropriate in this case, but has not briefed the issue.

Issue preclusion applies in nondischargeability proceedings to bar the relitigation of factual issues that were determined in a prior state court action. See, e.g., Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 284-85, n.11 (1991). To determine the issue-preclusive effect of a California state court's judgment, California preclusion law must be applied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738; Marrese v. Am. Acad. of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 380

(1985); Gayden v. Nourbakhsh (In re Nourbakhsh), 67 F.3d 798, 800 (9th Cir. 1995). Under California law, the party asserting issue preclusion has the burden of establishing the following "threshold" requirements:

the issue sought to be precluded must be identical to that decided in a former proceeding;
the issue must have been actually litigated in the former proceeding;
it must have been necessarily decided in the former proceeding;
the decision in the former proceeding must be final and on the merits; and,
the party against whom preclusion is sought must be the same as, or in privity with, the party to the former proceeding.

Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001).

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Additionally, the application of issue preclusion requires a "mandatory ‘additional’ inquiry into whether imposition of issue preclusion would be fair and consistent with sound public policy." In re Khaligh, 338 B.R. 817, 824–25 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2006). As stated by the California Supreme Court

We have repeatedly looked to the public policies underlying the doctrine before concluding that collateral estoppel should be applied in a particular setting. Accordingly, the public policies underlying

collateral estoppel—preservation of the integrity of the judicial system, promotion of judicial economy, and protection of litigants from harassment by vexatious litigation—strongly influence whether its application in a particular circumstance would be fair to the parties and constitutes sound judicial policy.

Lucido v. Super. Ct., 51 Cal. 3d 335, 342–43 (Cal. 1990) (internal citations omitted). The Court requires further briefing on the appropriateness of issue preclusion in this case, including legal arguments explaining how the applicable state court causes of action (presumably fraud by concealment) translate to the non-dischargeability standards.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for further briefing.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Javier Lopez Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Defendant(s):

Javier Lopez Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Carmen Lopez Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Joint Debtor(s):

Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By

Eamon Jafari

Plaintiff(s):

Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By

Eamon Jafari

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-20260

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al

#24.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc., against Javier Lopez. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

From: 5/11/17, 6/22/17, 8/17/17, 10/19/17, 11/9/17, 2/1/18, 2/8/18, 3/22/18, 5/30/18

Also # 23 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/29/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Javier Lopez Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Defendant(s):

Javier Lopez Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Carmen Lopez Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Plaintiff(s):

Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Javier Lopez

Eamon Jafari

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-14684

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01026 United States Trustee for the Central District of v. Lambert et al

#25.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01026. Complaint by United States Trustee for the Central District of California, Region 16 against Timothy Wayne Lambert, Lisa Renee Lambert. (Fee Not Required). with adversary cover sheet Nature of Suit: (41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))) (Green, Everett)

From: 3/21/18, 4/25/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

The UST has filed a Motion for Default Judgment which is set for hearing on August 1, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

This Status Conference is continued to the same date and time.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Timothy Wayne Lambert Pro Se

Lisa Renee Lambert Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

2:00 PM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

United States Trustee for the Central Represented By

Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01035 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson

#26.00 CONT Status Conference re Notice of Removal RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18- ap-01035. Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua C Richardson. Case No. RIC 1700456]; Attachments: # 1 Notice of Status Conference re Removal of Action Nature of Suit: 01 - Determination of removed claim or cause

From: 3/28/18, 6/13/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Defendant(s):

Joshua C Richardson Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By Laila Masud

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

2:00 PM

6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#27.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01123. Complaint by First Home Bank against Sean Karadas. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))(Kastan, Joshua)

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Sean Karadas Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-10208

Rolando Carlos Reyes

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01117 Pringle v. Reyes

#28.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01117. Complaint by John P. Pringle against Reginald Reyes. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). with Proof of Service Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)) (Iskander, Brandon)

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/24/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rolando Carlos Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Defendant(s):

Reginald Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Joint Debtor(s):

Florencia Aquino Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Plaintiff(s):

John P. Pringle Represented By Brandon J Iskander

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui

2:00 PM

CONT...

Rolando Carlos Reyes

Brandon J Iskander

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#29.00 CONT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss The Amended Adversary Complaint Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) and Fed. R. Bank. P

From: 7/24/18 Also # 30

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

Moving Defendant leads the analysis astray by conflating issues of standing to enforce the Consent Judgment with the question of standing of a Debtor-in-possession to prosecute a fraudulent conveyance action under § 548. However, that misdirection is rendered irrelevant once the focus shifts to the § 548 elements outlined in Plaintiff's opposition, and in particular on the glaring, inescapable conclusion that Plaintiff has failed to allege facts to support that a transfer occurred -- an essential element of a Section 548 cause of action.

Here the facts at issue pertain to the Defendants' alleged failure to act (at some point, although the Court is unclear of the basis for Plaintiff's allegation of a specific date for the transfer) to release or extinguish a junior lien against Debtor's property. But no specific affirmative act, or transfer of possession or ownership is alleged to have occurred. See Bernard v. Sheaffer (In re Bernard), 96 F.3d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1996) ("'[A] transfer is a disposition of an interest in property. The definition is as broad as possible. … Under this definition, any transfer of an interest in property is a transfer, including a transfer of possession, custody, or control even if there is no transfer of title, because possession, custody, and control are interests in property.") (citations omitted); Greenspan v. Orick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (In re Brobeck, Phleger & Harrision LLP), 408 B.R. 318, 338 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2009) ("Within the confines of these general principles, the general rule is that "[t]he hallmark of a 'transfer' is a change in the rights of the transferor with respect to the property after the transaction."); In re Feiler, 218 B.R. 957, 960 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1998), aff'd, 230 B.R.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

164 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1999), aff'd, 218 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2000) ("Within the context of a fraudulent transfer, the definition of transfer is sufficiently broad to include a transfer that results in a modification of form or value of property transferred or a deposit into or withdrawal from a bank account.") (citations omitted); Kapila v. U.S. (In re Taylor), 386 B.R. 361, 369 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.2008) (debtor's waiver of an NOL carryback constitutes a transfer).

Here, Plaintiff simply hasn't alleged any change of rights in property after any particular transaction, nor has Plaintiff otherwise presented any authority for its proposition that the Defendants' failure to release the lien somehow constitutes a transfer. Basically, it appears here that what the estate MAY have is a right to enforce the Consent Judgment so as to compel extinguishment of the junior lien. But that question is not before the Court, and the Court takes no position on whether it is a viable cause of action or if the Debtor even has standing to prosecute it. For that reason, the Court is inclined to find that the Plaintiff has failed to state an actionable claim under the bankruptcy code, and therefore the Amended Complaint should be dismissed.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#30.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01094. Complaint by Markus Anthony Boyd against U.S. BANK, SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC, Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 2 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 3 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 4 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 5 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 6 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 7 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint) Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Gebelt, Nicholas)

From: 6/26/18, 7/24/18 Also # 29

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

10:00 AM

6:14-24679

Richard Daguman Sabac and Lyn Cebrian Sabac

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Ford Fiesta, VIN: 3FADP4BJ7CM199341

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

07/31/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Daguman Sabac Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Lyn Cebrian Sabac Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Movant(s):

Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Richard Daguman Sabac and Lyn Cebrian Sabac

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-20006

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 483 Grapevine Dr, Corona CA 92882

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

From: 4/24/18, 5/29/18 EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:

Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carl J Charlot Represented By

Michael A Younge

Joint Debtor(s):

Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By April Harriott Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-20967

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13 #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1657 VIA VERDE DRIVE Rialto, CALIFORNIA, 92377 Under 11 U.S.C. § 362.

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK CASE DISMISSED: 7/25/18

Docket 61

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/25/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman

Joint Debtor(s):

Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Marc E Grossman

Movant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, Represented By

Dane W Exnowski

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-21236

Ronald A Waters and Trisha Waters

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 FORD F-150, VIN: 1FTF W1CT 7CFB 73990

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK

Docket 58

Tentative Ruling:

07/31/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ronald A Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Trisha Waters Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

MECHANICS BANK, INC., a Represented By Vincent V Frounjian

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Ronald A Waters and Trisha Waters

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 231 Arden Street, Hemet, CA 92543

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Docket 75

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 10:00 AM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Joint Debtor(s):

Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Movant(s):

FREEDOM MORTGAGE Represented By Jason C Kolbe Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido

10:00 AM

6:17-13923

Suzanne Berry

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11242 Sweetwater Dr.

Riverside, California 92505

MOVANT: CHAMPION MORTGAGE COMPANY (NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, DBA)

From: 6/26/18 EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

6/26/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Suzanne Berry Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Champion Mortgage Company Represented By Ashlee Fogle Sean C Ferry

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Suzanne Berry

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-14186

Joshua Aguilar and Cynthia Rodriguez

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Corolla

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

07/31/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENIED as to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joshua Aguilar Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Cynthia Rodriguez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By

Austin P Nagel

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Joshua Aguilar and Cynthia Rodriguez

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-19771

Patricia Anne Goffney

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6161 El Reposo Street San Bernardino, CA 92252

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

Docket 25

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/28/18 AT 10:00 AM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Patricia Anne Goffney Pro Se

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Christina J O

10:00 AM

6:18-10140

Manuel James Ritchie

Chapter 13 #9.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 29 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 278 Forest Circle, Crestline, CA 92325 .

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC CASE DISMISSED: 7/25/18

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/25/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manuel James Ritchie Represented By Scott Kosner

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By

Angie M Marth Kelsey X Luu

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10467

Wayman L Guider

Chapter 13 #10.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2756 La Salle Pointe, Chino Hills, CA 91709

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

From: 7/10/18, 7/24/18 EH

Docket 34

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/26/18

Tentative Ruling:

07/10/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Wayman L Guider Pro Se

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14516

Gary Ray Osborn

Chapter 13 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: sales proceeds from 1754 Valley Park Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 per dissolution of marriage & statement of decision in state court action

MOVANT: CATHERINE OSBORN

Docket 16

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/25/18 AT 10:00 AM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Ray Osborn Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

Catherine Osborn Represented By Robert S Altagen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14739

Judith Ann Hunter

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 29064 Steamboat Dr, Sun City, California 92585-2622

MOVANT: QUICKEN LOANS, INC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

07/31/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief pursuant to ¶¶ 3 and 6 of the prayer for relief. Request under § 362(d)

is DENIED based on the positive equity in the Property.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Judith Ann Hunter Pro Se
Movant(s):
Quicken Loans Inc. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14929

Donald Edward Marshall, Jr.

Chapter 7

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 202 Delle Drive Crestline CA 92325

MOVANT: RICHARD PHELAN

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
07/31/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

The real property declaration attached to the Motion is not signed. (Motion, p. 11). The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to ¶¶ 3 and 12. DENIED as to request for APO as moot.

The Movant shall file an amended real property declaration with holographic signature prior to lodging the order.

APPEARANCES WAIVED PROVIDED MOVANT HAS FILED AN AMENDED
REAL PROPERTY DECLARATION. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Donald Edward Marshall, Jr. Represented By Alexander Pham
Movant(s):
Richard Phelan Represented By Neil B Katz
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Donald Edward Marshall, Jr.

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14945

Harish S. Sharma and Neha H. Sharma

Chapter 7

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1945 N. CAMPUS AVE., SUITE C, UPLAND, CA 91784

MOVANT: THE COLONIES PACIFIC 19A, LLC

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
07/31/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY requests for assumption deadline and APO as moot. GRANT request to lift stay as to personal property on premises except that such order is limited to lifting of the stay and does not alter the Movant’s obligation to comply with applicable state and local laws.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Harish S. Sharma Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Neha H. Sharma Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Harish S. Sharma and Neha H. Sharma

Chapter 7
THE COLONIES PACIFIC 19A, Represented By
Ronald K Brown
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15235

Davy Ortiz

Chapter 7

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12543 Carmel Knolls Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739 Under 11 U.S.C. § 362.

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
07/31/18
Service: Proper
Opposition: None, Response indicating Debtor does not have knowledge about the Property
GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1), (d)(2) and (d)(4). Court finds that bankruptcy case was part of a scheme to hinder, delay and defraud creditors based on unauthorized transfers affecting this property. The Court does not find bad faith as to the Debtor. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY confirmation that no stay is in effect for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Davy Ortiz Pro Se
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
Dane W Exnowski
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Davy Ortiz

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16081

Rachael Dene Thomas

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 15526 Megan Ct., Fontana, CA 92336

MOVANT: 2014-2 IH BORROWER LP A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
07/31/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rachael Dene Thomas Pro Se
Movant(s):
2014-2 IH Borrower L.P., a Represented By Scott Andrews
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11

#17.00 CONT Emergency motion for Order Authorizing Debtor to Honor Pre-Petition Contracts and Make Payments in the Ordinary Course of Business
FINAL HEARING

From: 7/17/18 EH
Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-16964

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#18.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment/Memorandum of Points and Authorities on the Preclusive Effect of Plaintiff's State Court Judgment

From: 7/18/18 Also #19
EH

Docket 208
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/10/18 AT 2:00 PM
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
Defendant(s):
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
Movant(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-16964

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#19.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:13-ap-01171. Complaint by Charles Edward Schrader against Narinder Sangha . willful and malicious injury HOLDING DATE

From: 7/8/15, 11/4/15, 3/2/16, 12/14/16, 12/13/17, 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 7/12/17, 8/2/17, 9/27/17, 10/4/17, 11/1/17, 12/6/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 6/20/18,
7/18/18

Also #18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/10/18 AT 2:00 PM
Tentative Ruling:
02/28/2018

This hearing is vacated. The Status Conference is CONTINUED to March 21, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. The Court has provided notice to the parties of the continuance.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
Defendant(s):
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
2:00 PM
CONT...

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:16-19993

B & B Family, Incorporated

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01116 Forte v. B & B Family, Incorporated

#20.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01116. Complaint by Patricia Forte against B & B Family, Incorporated

From: 7/24/18 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Defendant(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Patricia Forte Represented By
D Edward Hays Laila Masud
2:00 PM
6:17-15717

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11

#21.00 Motion for order confirming chapter 11 plan Also #22
EH

Docket 156

Tentative Ruling:
1. BACKGROUND
  The Debtor is a California Corporation that operates a commercial plumbing business. The Debtor’s President and sole owner is Joe Ruvalcaba ("Ruvalcaba"). The Debtor owns no real property. Its major assets are equipment and vehicles. The precipitating factors leading to the bankruptcy filing were high monthly payments with lenders (due to high interest rates), expenses related to breach of contract suits, and related holds placed on the Debtor’s bank accounts.
2. DISCUSSION
  The debtor carries the burden of proving that a Chapter 11 plan complies with the statutory requirements for confirmation under §§ 1129(a) & (b). In re Arnold and Baker Farms, 177 B.R. 648 (9th Cir. BAP (Ariz.) 1994). The debtor must show that the plan is confirmable by a preponderance of the evidence. See id. at 654; see also In re Monarch Beach Venture, Ltd.,166 B.R. 428 (C.D.Cal.1993).
  1. Ballot Results:
    The Debtors timely transmitted the Plan and Disclosure Statement to all known Persons who hold Claims and Interests that are impaired under the Plan and who are therefore entitled to vote on the Plan. The Debtors received (5) five timely ballots. The votes were tallied as follows:
    1. Class 1 Allowed Claims secured by Personal Residence: N/A
    2. Class 2 Impaired Secured Claims: Classes 2B – 2G
      1. 2 ballots voted in favor, 100% of claims
    3. Class 3 Priority Claims:
      1. 1 ballot in favor, 100% of claims
        2:00 PM
        CONT...
        
        AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
    4. Class 4 General Unsecured Claims,
      1. 2 ballots voted in favor, 100% of claims
        
        Chapter 11
        
        A court can confirm a plan without resort to cram down if all impaired classes accept the plan. Here, all impaired classes have accepted the plan. Thus, cramdown is not required.
  2. Confirmation Requirements under 11 U.S.C. §1129(a)
  The Plan addresses the requirements of Bankruptcy Code 1129(a) as follows:
  1. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(1): The Plan complies with all of the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, including sections 1122 and 1123.
  2. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(2): The Debtor has complied with all of the Bankruptcy Code's applicable provisions.
  3. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(3): Good faith in proposing a plan of reorganization is assessed by the bankruptcy judge and viewed under the totality of the circumstances. In re Jorgensen, 66 B.R. 104, 108-109 (9th Cir. BAP 1986). Good faith requires that a plan will achieve a result consistent with the objectives and purposes of the Code. Jorgensen, 66 B.R. at 109. It also requires a fundamental fairness in dealing with one's creditors. Id. The bankruptcy judge is in the best position to assess the good faith of the parties. Id. Here, having received no objections to confirmation, the Court finds that the First Amended Plan has been proposed in good faith pursuant to FRBP 3020(b)(2).
  4. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(4): Debtor asserts that his Counsel will file a Fee Application on or before the Effective Date of the Plan. This satisfies the Bankruptcy Code's requirement that payments for services or for costs and expenses in or in connection with a case, or in connection with a plan and incident to a case, must be approved by, or subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable.
  5. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(5): Article III of the Plan regarding Means of Implementation requires Exhibits to the Disclosure Statement to disclose individuals that will serve as director/officers after compensation as well as insider compensation, etc. This provision does not appear to be addressed in the Plan and/or Disclosure Statement.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
    
    Chapter 11
    Debtor to address.
  6. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(6): does not apply to the instant case.
  7. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(7): Each Person who holds a Claim or Interest in a Class that is impaired under the Plan either: (a) has accepted the Plan; or (b) will receive or retain under the Plan property of a value, as of the Effective Date, that is not less than that Person would receive or retain if the Debtor were liquidated under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtor has demonstrated that all impaired interest holders have both accepted the plan, and will likely receive or retain under the Plan value that is not less than they would receive under a chapter 7 liquidation. Notably, unsecured creditors are expected to receive a 100% payout.
  8. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(8): Section 1129(a)(8) requires unanimity of all classes to consensually confirm a plan. That is, each impaired class must have affirmatively accepted the plan. The Ballot Tally above indicates that this requirement is satisfied because all impaired classes have affirmatively accepted the plan.
  9. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(9): Section 1129(a)(9)(A) requires that holders of administrative claims and gap claims be paid "cash equal to the allowed amount of such claim" on the "effective date of the plan," unless the holder of a particular claim agrees to different treatment. Here, the Plan provides for the payment of outstanding administrative fees upon approval of fees and on the effective date.
  10. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(10): This provision requires at least one class of claims that is impaired accept the plan. Classes 2, 3 and 4 have voted to accept the plan. Thus, this requirement is satisfied.
  11. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(11): Plan confirmation is not likely to be followed by either the liquidation or the further financial reorganization of the Reorganized Debtors or any successor to the Reorganized Debtors. The Issa Declaration at ¶¶ 28-32 provides sufficient evidence that the Debtor will have sufficient funds on the Effective Date to pay Administrative Claims, US Trustee Fees, Allowed Gap Claims, Allowed Priority Tax Claims, and Class 4 Non-Tax Claims. As the business is no longer operating, payment of Class 3 claims will depend on objections to claims, and any potential recovery from prosecution of causes of action. As such, the Court finds this
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
    
    Chapter 11
    requirement is satisfied.
  12. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(12): The treatment of Administrative Claims under the Plan satisfies the requirement of Bankruptcy Code section 1129(a)(12).
  13. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(13): does not apply to the instant case.
  14. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(14): does not apply to the instant case.
  15. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(15): does not apply to the instant case.
  16. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(16): The Plan provides for transfers in accordance with applicable nonbankruptcy law in the provision entitled "Article III, Means of Implementation, Funding". This provision is satisfied.
3. TENTATIVE RULING
  
  As set forth above, the Debtor’s First Amended Plan complies with the requirements of section 1129 except that the Debtor has not addressed the § 1129(a)(5) as required under the code. Debtor to address.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
  David Lozano
  Movant(s):
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
  David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15717
  
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #22.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization From: 6/6/18, 7/24/18
  Also #21 EH
  
  Docket 113
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
  David Lozano
  Movant(s):
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
  David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano
  2:00 PM
  6:17-19936
  
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #23.00 Second Motion for Order Authorizing Continued Use of Cash Collateral EH
  Docket 370
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10939
  
  Vance Zachary Johnson
  
  Chapter 7
  Adv#: 6:18-01100 Zamucen & Curren LLP v. Johnson
  
  #24.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01100. Complaint by Zamucen & Curren LLP against Vance Zachary Johnson . (d),(e)))
  
  EH
  
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
  Defendant(s):
  Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider
  Plaintiff(s):
  Zamucen & Curren LLP Represented By Patricia J Grace
  Trustee(s):
  Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
  2:00 PM
  6:18-11806
  
  Rick's Patio Inc
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #25.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 4/24/18 EH
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
  Robert B Rosenstein
  10:00 AM
  6:18-11678
  
  Jess Wayne Markham and Marie B Markham
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #1.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Ally Bank; (2016 CHEVROLET TRAVERSE VIN# 1GNKRHKD1GJ234396), In the amount of
  $25,099.68
  
  From: 7/11/18 EH
  Docket 14
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jess Wayne Markham Represented By Stephen H Darrow
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Marie B Markham Represented By Stephen H Darrow
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:11-33601
  
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #2.00 CONT Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 Chapter 7 Trustees Motion for Order (1) Approving Compromise of Products Liability Action, (2) Authorizing Employment of Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP As Co- Special Counsel And Payment of Compensation to Co-Special Counsel; and (3) Granting Related Relief Including Disbursements From the Settlement Payment
  
  From: 7/11/18 EH
  Docket 42
  Tentative Ruling:
  7/11/18
  1/31/18
  BACKGROUND
  On July 21, 2011, John & Carolyn Vega ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On November 2, 2011, Debtors received a discharge and five days later the case was closed.
  On March 1, 2017, UST filed a motion to reopen the case to investigate and administer litigation settlement proceeds. On December 12, 2017, the Chapter 7 trustee filed two motions to approve compromise. The first motion, between the estate and the debtors and primarily relating to the amount of Debtors’ exemption in the proceeds, was granted on January 5, 2018. The second motion was set for hearing and is under consideration now.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  John Vega and Carolyn Vega
  Chapter 7
  Pursuant to the instant compromise motion the Trustee requests: (1) approval of the compromise of the products liability action; (2) authorization to employ Audet & Partners LLP and Levin Simes LLP as co-special counsel and payment of their compensation; and (3) related relief, including approval of the settlement payment disbursements. No opposition to the instant compromise motion has been filed.
  DISCUSSION
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019(a) states: "On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct." The Court may grant approval if it determines that the compromise is "fair and equitable." See In re Berkeley Delaware Court, LLC, 834 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2016). In determining whether the compromise is fair and equitable, the Court applies a four-factor test. See In re DiCostanzo, 399 Fed. Appx. 307, 308 (9th Cir. 2010). The test was originally outlined in In re A & C Props., and provides for consideration of
  1. The probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it;

(d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.

The proposed settlement here, however, presents a unique situation. The proposed settlement represents an "aggregate settlement" negotiated in the context of,

11:00 AM

CONT...

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7

presumably, state or federal district court litigation. The proposed settlement has not been disclosed to the Court on the basis that it contains a confidentiality provision. Furthermore, Trustee motions lacks detail in its description of the situation. The nature, extent and value of Debtor’s claim are completely unknown to this Court. The factual situation giving rise to Debtor’s claim is unclear, and the Court lacks any ability to estimate the value of the claim. Furthermore, as a result of the absence of information, the Court lacks the information necessary to determine the reasonableness of the requested attorney’s fees.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion or CONTINUE the matter for supplemental evidence and analysis.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Vega Represented By

Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Carolyn Vega Represented By Jenny L Doling

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

John Vega and Carolyn Vega

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-10048

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3300 Mary Ellen Dr, Riverside, California 92509-0816

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

From: 5/15/18, 6/26/18 EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:

5/15/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court regarding extent of arrears and status of adequate protection discussions, if any.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Margaret Crain Represented By Yelena Gurevich

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt Jessica L Carter

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-16994

Yolanda Llamas

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1345 West F Street, Ontario, CA 91762

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK

From: 6/26/18, Advanced from 8/31/18 EH

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

6/26/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.

DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Yolanda Llamas Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Yolanda Llamas

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-26429

Iraj Maqsoudi

Chapter 7 #5.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 112

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/18

On October 3, 2013, Iraj Maqsoudi ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 14, 2014, Debtor obtained a discharge. On January 15, 2014, Trustee filed an application to employ Wesley H. Avery, APC ("Counsel") as general bankruptcy counsel. That application was approved by the Court on February 13, 2014.

On January 21, 2014, Trustee filed a complaint against Mandana Banihashem for: (1) avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfer; (2) avoidance and recovery of preferential transfer; and (3) accounting and turnover. Ultimately, on September 4, 2015, Trustee prevailed on summary judgment with regard to nine of the eleven causes of action.

On January 30, 2014, Trustee filed a complaint Debtor (1) to revoke the Debtor’s discharge; and (2) for an accounting and turnover. Ultimately, this adversary was voluntarily dismissed by Trustee on July 12, 2016.

On December 2, 2015, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Neiman Realty ("Broker") as a real estate broker. On March 22, 2016, the Court approved the sale of certain real property located at 11889 Magnolia Ave., Riverside, CA 92503, which was the subject of the transfer adversary proceeding, for the amount of

$692,000.

On October 19, 2016, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Donald Fife ("Accountant") as accountant.

On February 2, 2017, Counsel filed a fee application in the aggregate amount of

11:00 AM

CONT...

Iraj Maqsoudi

Chapter 7

$158,944.97.1 On April 3, 2017, Accountant filed a fee application in the aggregate amount of $2,401.10. Pursuant to Court order entered April 3, 2017, the Court also allowed an administrative expense for the attorney for creditor Mustafa Mayar, who conducted an examination of Debtor in the case, in the total amount of $8,491.02.

11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) (2005) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. After a review of Counsel’s fee application, the Court has significant concerns with the amount requested, primarily based upon the excessiveness of the amounts billed, and the fact that the entire case was billed at $475/hour without any time billed by associations or paralegals at lower rates. For example, the first day that Counsel worked on the case, January 13, 2014, Counsel lists the following time entries (with the amount charged):

-Telephone conference with the Trustee regarding new matter: $95

-Review of encumbrances against commercial building and calculation of approximate fair market value: $712.50

-Review of motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor: $427.50

-Legal research in support of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor: $237.50

-Preparation of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor, and preparation of Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof: $2,042.50

-Preparation of declarations in support of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor; telephone call with the Trustee’s broker re same: $1,330

-Review and analysis of Notice of Claims Bar Date: $95

-Review of encumbrances against residence and calculation of approximate fair market value: $570.

The Court notes the following concerns with Counsel’s billing on the first day on the case. First, 4.3 hours for the opposition and points and authorities appears excessive, given that the documents contain two paragraphs, two additional sentences, and some "fill-in-the-blank" responses. Second, 2.8 hours for the declarations appears excessive, given that each declaration is approximately one- page long. Third, the totality of 11.6 hours for what constituted opposing the relief

11:00 AM

CONT...

Iraj Maqsoudi

from stay and, possibly, some minor case research, appears excessive. This is especially true in light of the fact that by the time Counsel had completed the opposition to the relief from stay, it had billed 10.2 hours for the day. The opposition, however, was filed at 3:50 p,m,, implying that the telephone conference with the Trustee must have started no later than 5:38 a.m., even if Counsel worked continuously on the matter thereafter.

Chapter 7

The issues noted above are not the exception in the billing summary submitted by Counsel, but, rather, the trend. Similarly, on March 10th and 11, 2014, Counsel billed nine hours for opposing Debtor’s motion to convert to Chapter 13; Trustee’s opposition was not extensive and Debtor’s schedules indicated he had no disposable income at the time. Likewise, on October 31-November 1, 2016, Counsel billed 7.4 hours for preparation of the fee application narrative, which is approximately five pages long and mostly form language. Finally, between May 28, 2015 and June 10, 2015, Counsel billed 21.8 hours for the preparation of the pleadings related to the summary judgment motion in the § 548 adversary proceeding, which appears to include more than seven hours billed for the preparation of the Trustee’s real estate broker’s declaration, a declaration which was approximately a page and contained various broker documents as exhibits.

Additionally, Counsel’s billing entries appear to include excessive charges for relatively routine tasks. The following are some of the examples:

1/16/14 – "Review of the discharge of the Debtor" -- $47.50

3/25/14 – "Review and analysis of tentative ruling for status conference" -- $95 4/30/14—"Preparation of request for mediation and order thereon" (two entries) --

$950

7/19/14 – "Review and analysis of Mediator’s certificate" (two entries) -- $95 10/14/15-10/15/14 –Preparation of status reports for two status conferences --

$1,975

12/3/15 -- Preparation of two, relatively simple orders -- $950

While the issues noted above may be representative of the concerns with Counsel’s fee application, the issues are by no means limited to the entries listed above.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Iraj Maqsoudi

Chapter 7

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Iraj Maqsoudi Represented By

Thomas W Gillen - DISBARRED - John F Brady

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Wesley H Avery

11:00 AM

6:16-18818

Henrico Guillermo Vidales and Guillermina Vidales

Chapter 7 #6.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

Trustee Fees: $ 1,066.88 Trustee Expenses: $ 52.02

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Henrico Guillermo Vidales Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt

Joint Debtor(s):

Guillermina Vidales Represented By Yolanda Flores-Burt

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7 #7.00 Application for Compensation for Brett Ramsaur, Trustee's Attorney, Period: 1/18/2017 to 2/28/2018, Fee: $38910.50, Expenses: $1554.36

Docket 183

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/18

On February 26, 2016, Sam & Greeta Dason ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On February 22, 2017, the Court approved the employment application of Ramsaur Law Office ("Applicant") to serve as Trustee’s counsel. On March 6, 2017, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ GlassRatner as real estate broker. On March 7, 2017, the Court approved the application of Karl T. Anderson CPA, Inc. to serve as Trustee’s accountant. Since the employment of these professionals, the Court has approved a Rule 9019 compromise [Dkt. No. 133] and two § 363 sale motions [Dkt. Nos. 146 & 172].

On July 11, 2018, Applicant filed the instant fee application. Local Rule 2016-(1)(a)(2)(A) states, in part:

In all cases where the employment of more than one professional person has been authorized by the court, a professional person who files an application for interim fees must give other professional persons employed in the case not less than 45 days notice of the date and time of the hearing.

Here, there was more than one professional person employed, yet Applicant did not comply with the above rule. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to September 26, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. to comply with

11:00 AM

CONT...

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

the above rule.

Chapter 7

Debtor(s):

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to file and service notice of continuance.

Party Information

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Joint Debtor(s):

Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Movant(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

11:00 AM

6:18-10740

Karin Olaya

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 7 to 13 EH

Docket 20

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/18

BACKGROUND

On January 31, 2018, Karin Olaya ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On June 29, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to convert case under 11 U.S.C. § 706(a). On July 3, 2018, the Court entered an order setting the matter for hearing [Dkt No. 21]. The Court’s order identified service and notice requirements, which were not complied with, and also stated that: "The Debtor is to specifically address the request for conversion in light of Schedule J showing negative disposable income." No supplement or reply was filed by Debtor. On July 6, 2018, Trustee filed opposition to the conversion motion.

Debtor’s schedules identify an interest in real property located at 12310 Columbia Ln., Mira Loma, CA 91752 (the "Property"). The schedules list the value of the property as

$565,000, a lien in the amount of $334,150, a second lien in the amount of $150,000 and an exemption of $100,000. Trustee believes the Property is undervalued by approximately $100,000, which would provide for equity in the Property above Debtor’s exemption. Debtor’s schedules I and J list disposable income of -$50.32 per month.

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Karin Olaya

Chapter 7

11 U.S.C. § 706(a) (2005) states:

The debtor may convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 11, 12, or 13 of this title at any time, if the case has not been converted under section 1112, 1208, or 1307 of this title. Any waiver of the right to convert a case under this subsection is unenforceable.

The Supreme Court has recently held that this right to conversion is not absolute. Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass., 549 U.S. 365, 373-74 (2007); see also In re Santos, 561 B.R. 825, 829 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2017) ("Therefore, Marrama concluded that an individual whose potential Chapter 13 case was subject to dismissal or conversion under § 1307(c) was not entitled to a right to convert. Because §

1307(c) provides for conversion or dismissal "for cause", it follows that the Court has the authority to deny conversion "for cause".).

Trustee identifies three reasons why conversion should be denied: (1) Debtor has no disposable income to fund a plan; and (2) the undervaluation of the Property and the instant conversion motion suggest Debtor is proceeding in bad faith.

While both of these reasons, independently and in combination, may contribute to a conclusion that there exists cause for dismissal or conversion pursuant to § 1307(c), the first reason is determinative in this situation. 11 U.S.C. § 1307(d) states: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a case may not be converted to a case under another chapter of this title unless the debtor may be a debtor under such chapter." 11 U.S.C. § 109(e) requires an individual filing under Chapter 13 to be an "individual with regular income". And 11 U.S.C. § 101(30) defines "individual with regular income" as an: "individual whose income is sufficiently stable and regular to enable such individual to make payments under a plan under Chapter 13 of this title, other than a stockbroker or a commodity broker." Debtor’s schedules, which identify a net income of -$50.32, compel a conclusion that Debtor is not an "individual with regular income" within the meaning of the Code, and, therefore, Debtor is ineligible to

11:00 AM

CONT...

Karin Olaya

Chapter 7

be a Chapter 13 debtor at this time. Because Debtor is ineligible to be a Chapter 13 debtor, her case cannot be converted pursuant to § 706(d).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Karin Olaya Represented By

Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Karin Olaya Represented By

Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

11:00 AM

6:18-12834

Jose D. Gutierrez and Otilia Gutierrez

Chapter 7 #9.00 Motion for extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge EH

Docket 20

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/18

BACKGROUND

On April 6, 2018, Jose & Otilia Gutierrez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. The meeting of creditors was originally set for May 8, 2018. On July 9, 2018, UST filed a motion for an extension of time to file a complaint objecting to discharge. UST asserts that Debtor has connections to several business entities and has not yet adequately complied with UST’s requests for financial records. The meeting of creditors has been continued several times.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(a) states:

In a chapter 7 case, a complaint, or a motion under § 727(a)(8) or (9) of the Code, objecting to the debtor’s discharge shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). In a chapter 11 case, the complaint shall be filed no later than the first date set for the hearing on confirmation. In a chapter 13 case, a motion objecting to the debtor’s discharge under § 1328(f) shall be filed no later than 60 days

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose D. Gutierrez and Otilia Gutierrez

after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). At least 28 days’ notice of the time so fixed shall be given to the United States trustee and all creditors as provided in Rule 2002(f) and (k) and to the trustee and the trustee’s attorney.

Chapter 7

And FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 4004(b) states:

On motion of any party in interest, after notice and hearing, the court may for cause extend the time to object to discharge. Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2), the motion shall be filed before the time has expired.
A motion to extent the time to object to discharge may be filed after the time for objection has expired and before discharge is granted if (A) the objection is based on facts that, if learned after the discharge, would provide a basis for revocation under § 727(d) of the Code, and (B) the movant did not have knowledge of those facts in time to permit an objection. The motion shall be filed promptly after the movant discovers the facts on which the objection is based.

Here, the delay in providing information adequate to assess the financial circumstances of Debtor constitutes sufficient cause to extend the deadline. See COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 4004.03[2] (16th ed. 2013) ("A debtor’s delays in responding to discovery may be sufficient cause. Obviously, a delay in the meeting of creditors to a date close to or after the deadline may constitute such cause.") (citing In re McCormack, 244 B.R. 203 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2000)).

Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose may be deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and EXTEND the deadline to file an

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose D. Gutierrez and Otilia Gutierrez

Chapter 7

objection to discharge to September 7, 2018.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose D. Gutierrez Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Joint Debtor(s):

Otilia Gutierrez Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-19176

AF Howlader, Inc.

Chapter 7 #10.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 3 by Claimant Michael Snow EH

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/2018

BACKGROUND:

On November 3, 2017, AF Howlader, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On June 1, 2018, Michael Snow ("Creditor") filed a proof of claim in the amount of $3,250,000 ("Claim 3"). On June 27, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to Claim 3. On July 19, 2018, Creditor filed a response to Trustee’s objection.

Trustee argues that it is unclear whether Debtor is liable for Claim 3, and additionally argues that Claim 3 is not supported by adequate supporting documentation. The Court notes that Trustee failed to use the Court’s mandatory claim objection form.

Claim 3 states that it is based on a personal injury lawsuit, and Creditor attaches a copy of a state court complaint filed on October 25, 2016. Among the defendants listed in the state court complaint is Sporty Gift Shoppe ("SGS"). According to the state court complaint, Creditor purchased an e-cigarette from a retail kiosk of SGS which, after four days, exploded in his face, causing "severe facial bleeding and disfigurement." Trustee acknowledges that Debtor operated SGS, but asserts that the legal relationship between the two entities is unclear. Trustee further argues that

11:00 AM

CONT...

AF Howlader, Inc.

Chapter 7

liability has not yet been established because the state court litigation is not complete.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

AF Howlader, Inc.

Chapter 7

ANALYSIS:

Here, Trustee has asserted that the legal relationship between Debtor and SGS is unclear, shifting the burden to Creditor to establish that Debtor is in fact liable for Claim 3. Creditor has responded by presenting Debtor’s answer in state court, which establishes that SGS was the dba of Debtor. This is consistent with the results of Trustee’s business entity search, which indicate that SGS was not a separate legal entity. As a result, the evidence compels the conclusion that Debtor and SGS are one and the same, and Trustee’s argument should be rejected.

Trustee also asserts that Claim 3 should be disallowed because the state court has not yet issued judgment. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) defines claim as:

right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured; or
right to an equitable remedy, for breach of performance if such breach gives rise to a right to payment, whether or not such right to an equitable remedy is reduced to judgment, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, secured, or unsecured

11 U.S.C. § 502 enumerates categories of claims which will be disallowed. Pertinently, § 502(b)(1) states the following:

Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall
11:00 AM
CONT...

AF Howlader, Inc.
determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that –

(1) such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured;

Chapter 7

And 11 U.S.C. § 502(c) states that:
There shall be estimated for purposes of allowance under this section –
1. any contingent or unliquidated claims, the fixing of liquidation of which, as the case may be, would unduly delay the administration of the case; or
2. any right to payment arising from a right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance

The legal provisions recited above make clear that the fact that a claim is contingent, unliquidated or unmatured is not a basis for the disallowance of a claim, and Trustee’s argument must be rejected.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection. Trustee to inform Court whether it wishes to seek a valuation of Claim 3.

11:00 AM

CONT...

AF Howlader, Inc.

Chapter 7

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

AF Howlader, Inc. Represented By Dina Farhat

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-14684

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01026 United States Trustee for the Central District of v. Lambert et al

#11.00 Motion for Default Judgment Also #12

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

8/1/18

BACKGROUND

On June 4, 2017, Timothy and Lisa Lambert ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. The Court extended the time to file a complaint objecting to discharge on two occasions: (1) on October 5, 2017 (Dkt. No. 17); and (2) on November 9, 2017 (Dkt.

No. 26).

On January 19, 2018, UST filed a complaint against Debtor for denial of discharge pursuant to § 727(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4) and (a)(5), or, alternatively, for dismissal of the bankruptcy case pursuant to § 707(b)(3) and § 349. On April 12, 2019, default was entered against Debtors. On July 10, 2018, UST filed a motion for default judgment.

UST’s complaint arises out of Debtors’ ownership of a Michigan LLC called Rainbow Recovery & Transport ("Rainbow Recovery"). According to UST, Debtors "solicited individuals to provide funds to them or Rainbow Recovery based on misrepresentations," and then undertook various actions to hinder their creditors’ collection efforts. UST also asserts that Debtors schedules and statement of financial

11:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

affairs omitted various recreational vehicles purchased in 2017, omitted the sale of undeveloped real property, which also occurred in 2017, and omitted the sale of Rainbow Recovery, which, again, occurred in 2017, and, as a result of which, Debtors were received installment payments.

DISCUSSION

Entry of Default

FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
Motion for Default Judgment
1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
  1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
    1. Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing
      11:00 AM
      CONT...
      
      Timothy Wayne Lambert
      a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
      
      Chapter 7
      
      Here, Plaintiff properly served Debtors and their counsel at their addresses of record.
2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
  
  Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").
  
  Here, the complaint includes five causes of action: § 727(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(5), and, alternatively, § 707(b)(3) and § 349. The memorandum of points and authorities in support of UST’s motion for default judgment only explicitly addresses § 727(a)(4) and (a)(2), and implicitly contains a preference for § 727(a)(4), referring to § 727(a)
3. Amount of Damages

Here, UST is not requesting any damages, and, therefore, no evidence is required establishing the amount of damages.

TENTATIVE RULING

11:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, DENYING Debtor a discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2)(A).

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Timothy Wayne Lambert Pro Se

Lisa Renee Lambert Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Movant(s):

United States Trustee for the Central Represented By

Everett L Green

Plaintiff(s):

United States Trustee for the Central Represented By

Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-14684

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01026 United States Trustee for the Central District of v. Lambert et al

#12.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01026. Complaint by United States Trustee for the Central District of California, Region 16 against Timothy Wayne Lambert, Lisa Renee Lambert. (Fee Not Required). with adversary cover sheet Nature of Suit: (41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e)

From: 3/21/18, 4/25/18, 7/25/18 Also #11

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

07/25/2018

The UST has filed a Motion for Default Judgment which is set for hearing on August 1, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

This Status Conference is continued to the same date and time.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Timothy Wayne Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Timothy Wayne Lambert Pro Se

Lisa Renee Lambert Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy Wayne Lambert

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Renee Lambert Represented By Edgar P Lombera

Plaintiff(s):

United States Trustee for the Central Represented By

Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-16941

Timothy P Carroll and Terri Sue Carroll

Chapter 13 #1.00 Motion with Notice for Order to continue Case Administration of deceased Debtors Bankruptcy Estate and For Waiver of Financial management Class and Certification Requirements Under 11 U.S.C Sect 1328(a) and (h) and 11 U.S.C Sect 522(q)

Docket 108

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

The Motion seeks an order permitting continued case administration pursuant to FRBP 1016 and waiver of the application and certification requirements of Section 1328 and 522(q) owing to the death of the Joint Debtor, Timothy Carroll. In support, Terri Carroll has submitted a declaration signed under penalty of perjury attesting to her completion of plan payments and to the death of her spouse. Moreover, the Court notes that no objection or opposition to the Debtors’ request has been filed.

Based on the foregoing, in particular given the completion of plan payments due under the terms of the confirmed plan, the Court finds that a discharge is warranted as to both Debtors and is in the best interest of all parties. The Motion is GRANTED. Case administration may continue pursuant to FRBP 1016 and Timothy Carroll is excused from compliance with §§ 1328 and 522(q) of the Code.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Timothy P Carroll Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Joint Debtor(s):

11:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy P Carroll and Terri Sue Carroll

Chapter 13

Party Information

Donnita M. Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Donnita M. Oliver Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16946

Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue

Chapter 13 #5.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 6/28/18 Also #6

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Yvette Blue Represented By

Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Movant(s):

Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Yvette Blue Represented By

Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16946

Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Also #5 EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Yvette Blue Represented By

Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#7.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (Third Amended Complaint) EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 12, 2016, Douglas and Anne Goodman (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief.

On November 11, 2016, Mark and Natasha Reynoso (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint seeking determination of the dischargeability of a debt pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) (the "Complaint"). Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that in 2015, they purchased real property located at 1656 West Lisbon Street in Upland, CA (the "Property") from the Debtors, and that a sale was consummated on the misrepresentations of the Debtors’ agent, Theresa Mann, that the Property was 3,231 square feet while Plaintiffs assert that the Property is actually 2,713 square feet (or a difference of 518 square feet). Plaintiffs also assert that they were led to believe that a water leak in the upstairs bathroom had been repaired. Plaintiffs allege that the Debtors knew or should have known that their agent was making false and misleading representations to Plaintiffs.

On February 3, 2017, the Court entered an order granting Defendants first motion to dismiss the Complaint, with leave to amend. A First Amended Complaint (the "FAC") was filed on February 28, 2017. On April 19, 2017, the Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint captioned "Corrected" which indicated it had been corrected for typographical errors. (the "Corrected Complaint"). The Court denied Defendants’ second motion to dismiss at a hearing on May 4, 2017. On June 5, 2017, the Defendants filed their Answer to the FAC ("Answer").

On March 9, 2018, the Defendants moved to dismiss the April 19, 2018,

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

complaint. The Court granted the motion to dismiss the April 19, 2018, complaint with leave to amend. A second amended complaint was then filed on May 23, 2018 (the "SAC"). [Note: there is a dispute regarding whether the operative complaint is a second or third amended complaint due to the filing of the "corrected complaint" indicated above. For purposes of this hearing, the operative complaint is Docket No. 93]. Defendants now move to dismiss the SAC. No opposition has been filed by the Plaintiffs.

DISCUSSION

As a threshold matter, the Motion seeks relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).

However, given that the Defendants have filed an Answer to the FAC, the Court shall construe the Motion as a motion under Rule 12(c), a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Civil Rule 12(c) standard

"After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings." Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). "Judgment on the pleadings is properly granted when, taking all allegations in the pleading as true, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Knappenberger v. City of Phx., 566 F.3d 936, 939 (9th Cir.2009) (quoting Merchants Home Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Frank B. Hall & Co., 50 F.3d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir.1995)).

On a Rule 12(c) motion, the court must accept as true all the material facts alleged in the complaint and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non- moving party. Fleming v. Pickard, 581 F.3d 922, 925 (9th Cir.2009). In ruling on a Rule 12(c) motion, the court may not consider extrinsic evidence unless the motion is converted into a Rule 56 summary judgment. Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1550 (9th Cir.1989) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c); Bonilla v. Oakland Scavenger Co., 697 F.2d 1297, 1301 (9th Cir.1982)). However, a court may consider facts that are contained in materials of which the court may take judicial notice when considering a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Heliotrope Gen., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 189 F.3d 971, 981 n. 18 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Barron v. Reich, 13 F.3d 1370, 1377 (9th Cir.1994)).

The crux of Defendants’ argument for dismissal of the FAC is that Plaintiffs have not set forth the basis for a money judgment under state law. In the Court’s

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

tentative ruling on the motion to dismiss the FAC, the Court stated the following:

The Ninth Circuit has held that a bankruptcy court may enter a monetary judgment on a disputed state law fraud claim in the course of determining that the debt is nondischargeable. Cowen v. Kennedy (In re Kennedy), 108 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir.1997). Shawn Deitz v. Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford (In re Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford), 469 B.R. 11, 21 (9th Cir. BAP 2012), aff'd, 760 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2014). Here, although the Complaint is not explicit regarding the state law causes of action at issue, it appears implicit in the allegations that the Plaintiffs seek a monetary judgment as to a fraud or misrepresentation claim.

Nonetheless, Plaintiffs should not have to guess at the state law basis of the debt for a money judgment.

Here, the SAC has added bases for calculation of damages under state law but has still not set forth the state law basis for the monetary judgment.

Thus, the Plaintiffs have still not addressed the concerns raised by the Court and Defendants that they do not have sufficient notice of the basis for a monetary judgment such that the Defendants can adequately defend themselves in the action.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, including the Plaintiffs failure to file opposition to the Motion to Dismiss which can be deemed as consent to the granting of the Motion pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion dismissing the SAC with leave to amend, in order to provide the Plaintiffs with an opportunity to set forth the specific bases for monetary damages under state law such that the litigation can proceed.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Edward T Weber

Chapter 13

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-19207

Marquis Vincent Campbell

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion to vacate dismissal due to trustee's motion to dismiss EH

Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

Debtor moves to vacate dismissal of the case due to the mistake of counsel in not calendaring the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss of the Trustee. The Trustee recommends conditional approval of the Motion if Counsel can certify to the Court at the hearing that she is holding $15,240. Additionally, the Trustee requires that no later than July 5, 2018, the Debtor must submit copies of the 2017 federal and state tax returns and any refunds to the Trustee.

The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion on Trustee’s conditions.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Marquis Vincent Campbell Represented By Eliza Ghanooni

Movant(s):

Marquis Vincent Campbell Represented By Eliza Ghanooni Eliza Ghanooni Eliza Ghanooni Eliza Ghanooni

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Marquis Vincent Campbell

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-13063

Ethel N Odimegwu

Chapter 13 #9.00 Application for Compensation with proof of service for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.00.

Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-13165

Richard Ortiz and Dolores Ortiz

Chapter 13 #10.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

Debtors move to vacate dismissal of the case due to the Debtors’ alleged pneumonia which temporarily incapacitated them. The Trustee recommends conditional approval of the Motion if Counsel can certify to the Court at the hearing that she is holding

$1,613. Additionally, the Trustee requires that no later than July 15, 2018, the Debtors must submit copies of the 2017 federal and state tax returns and any refunds to the Trustee.

The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion on Trustee’s conditions.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Ortiz Represented By Elena Steers

Joint Debtor(s):

Dolores Ortiz Represented By Elena Steers

Movant(s):

Richard Ortiz Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Richard Ortiz and Dolores Ortiz

Elena Steers

Chapter 13

Dolores Ortiz Represented By Elena Steers

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01127 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC et al

#11.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Lack of Standing; Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Discretionary Abstention; and Failure to State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted filed by LoanCare, LLC and Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC

Also #12 EH

Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/2018

BACKGROUND

On March 29, 2018, Melanie Tarhuni ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 13 relief. On June 1, 2018, the Debtor (in pro per) filed the instant adversary proceeding against Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, FNF Servicing dba Loancare, LLC, Les Zieve, John Steele, Janaya Carter, and Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP, a limited liability partnership ("Defendants").

The Debtor’s bankruptcy case was dismissed on June 7, 2018, at the hearing on confirmation. On July 5, 2017, LoanCare, LLC and Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint ("Motion"). The Debtor filed her Opposition to the Motion on July 19, 2018. On July 26, 2018, LoanCare and Lakeview filed their reply.

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Melanie Tarhuni

The dismissal of a bankruptcy case has several ramifications as set out in

Chapter 13

Bankruptcy Code Section 349. The Ninth Circuit has explained, "Section 349 of the Bankruptcy Code lists the various effects of dismissal of the underlying bankruptcy case; conspicuously absent from that list is automatic termination of jurisdiction of related cases." In re Carraher, 971 F.2d 327, 328 (9th Cir. 1992). The bankruptcy court may retain jurisdiction over a related proceeding subject to considerations of judicial economy, fairness, convenience and comity. In re Casamont Inv'rs, Ltd., 196 B.R. 517, 522 (9th Cir. BAP 1996).

Here, the Debtor’s underlying bankruptcy case was dismissed shortly after the initial filing. The instant adversary proceeding has been pending for two months during which no significant actions have been taken to advance the litigation. Given that the claims of the Debtor relate primarily to a determination of the lien rights of the Defendants under state law and to claims made pursuant to the FDCPA, which may be brought in the District Court and over which this Court cannot make final rulings pursuant to Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S. Ct. 2594, 180 L. Ed. 2d 475 (2011), the Court has determined that the principles of judicial economy, fairness, convenience and comity do not favor this Court’s retention of jurisdiction over the action.

As an alternative grounds for dismissal, the Court incorporates the findings related to jurisdiction into the Opposition’s analysis regarding abstention and adopts the Opposition’s analysis. The Court finds that abstention is appropriate in this case.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion dismissing the instant adversary proceeding.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Melanie Tarhuni

Party Information

Chapter 13

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

FNF Servicing Inc Pro Se

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs

LoanCare, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By Jennifer Needs

Movant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

LoanCare, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01127 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC et al

#12.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01127. Complaint by Melanie Tarhuni against Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC , FNF Servicing Inc , Les Zieve , John Steele , Janaya Carter . (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)) ,(71 (Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay)) ,(91 (Declaratory judgment))

Also #11 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

FNF Servicing Inc Pro Se

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs

LoanCare, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

11:00 AM

CONT...

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By Jennifer Needs

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13172

Michelle Cadena Quinn

Chapter 13 #13.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Principal Residence with Real-Time Resolutions/GreenPoint Mortgage Funding Inc

Also #14 EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

Hearing Date: 07/31/18

Summary of the Motion:

Notice: Proper

Opposition: None

Address: 3656 Valley Court, San Bernardino, CA 92407 First trust deed: $452,471 with Seterus (Payoff Statement) Second trust deed (to be avoided): $127,972 with Real-Time

Resolutions/GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. (Payoff Statement 4/20/18)

Fair market value (per appraisal and declaration): $390,000

TENTATIVE

GRANT upon receipt of a chapter 13 discharge.

APPEARANCE IS WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued to the next Chapter 13 calendar.

PREVAILING PARTY SHOULD SUBMIT THE FORM ORDER WITHIN 7 DAYS, A BLANK COPY OF WHICH MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM THE JUDGE’S FORMS SECTION ON THE COURT’S WEBSITE.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Michelle Cadena Quinn

Chapter 13

Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert Steven A Alpert Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15098

Fatana Aziz

Chapter 13 #14.00 Motion with Notice By United States Trustee To Dismiss Chapter 13 Case With A Re-Filing Bar; Memo of Ps and As; Decl of: Abram S. Feuerstein

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

BACKGROUND

On June 18, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Fatana Aziz (the "Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 13 relief.

On July 3, 2018, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Case with a Re-Filing Bar (the "Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

Section 1307(c) provides that after notice and a hearing, "the court may convert a case under [Chapter 13] to a case under chapter 7 of this title, or may dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause." 11 U.S.C. § 1307. "Section 1307(c) enumerates eleven non- exclusive grounds which may constitute ‘cause’ for dismissal." In re Ellsworth, 455

B.R. 904, 914 (9th Cir. BAP 2011). Although not specifically enumerated, "bad faith" may constitute "cause." Id. In determining whether a Chapter 13 petition has been filed in bad faith, a bankruptcy court should review the "totality of the circumstances." In re Eisen, 14 F.3d 469, 470 (9th Cir. 1994). In reviewing the totality of the circumstances, a court should consider:

whether the debtor misrepresented facts in his or her petition or plan, unfairly
manipulated the Bankruptcy Code or otherwise filed the Chapter 13 petition or plan in an
inequitable manner;
11:00 AM
CONT...

Fatana Aziz
the debtor’s history of filings and dismissals;
whether the debtor’s only purpose in filing for chapter 13 protection is to defeat state
court litigation; and
whether egregious behavior is present.

Chapter 13

In re Leavitt, 171 F.3d 1219, 1224 (9th Cir. 1999).

Here, the UST asserts as grounds for dismissal that the Debtor has filed three cases since 2016 (Case No. 16-20907, Case No. 17-17926, Case No. 18-15098). Two of the Debtor’s prior cases were dismissed for failure to file information and the instant case was filed as incomplete with the balance of schedules due on July 2, 2018. As of the date of the filing of the Motion, the Debtor had not filed the missing schedules. Additionally, in the current case, the Debtor listed one creditor, Wells Fargo, which indicates that the sole reason for the filing is to frustrate Wells Fargo Bank.

Here, for the reasons set forth by the UST, based primarily on the history of filings, and the repeated conduct of the Debtor in failing to comply with Court- imposed deadlines, the Court finds that cause exists to dismiss the Debtor’s case. Additionally, the Debtors apparent attempts to file bankruptcy for the sole purpose of forestalling creditors warrants a one-year bar under the Court’s § 105 and § 349 authority as requested by the UST.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, including the Debtor’s failure to file opposition which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the Motion under LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fatana Aziz Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Fatana Aziz

Chapter 13

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12236

Michael Anthony Rivera

Chapter 13 #15.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 5/24/18, 6/28/18, 7/19/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael Anthony Rivera Represented By Michael A Rivera

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12819

Adrian Lopez and Patricia Lopez

Chapter 13 #16.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/7/18, 7/19/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adrian Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11993

Anisha Christel Wilson

Chapter 13 #17.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 5/24/18, 6/28/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anisha Christel Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13 #18.00 Motion for Setting Property Value Also #19

Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

BACKGROUND

On April 20, 2018, Ridge Robert ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2013 Toyota Camry (the "Camry"). On July 3, 2018, the Debtor filed his Motion to Value the Camry ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

The Debtor asserts that the Camry’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $6,600, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $2,366. In support the Debtor has attached a copy of the Kelly Blue Book. However, the copy of the Kelly Blue Book printout attached to the Motion does not indicate pertinent facts of the Camry such as the make and model of the vehicle necessary to corroborate the Debtor’s assertion of value.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13

Finally, as to service, Wells Fargo was not properly served via FRBP 7004 to the attention of an officer and was also not served at the PO Box requested for bankruptcy-related notices on its proof of claim.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for a hearing on August 30, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for Debtor to provide supplemental documentation to corroborate the assertion of value as set forth above and for the Debtor to re-serve the Motion and supplemental documentation on Wells Fargo as indicated above. The deadline to file and serve the supplemental documents is August 9, 2018.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to file and serve notice of the continuance, a copy of the Motion, and supplemental documentation per the Court’s instructions.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Movant(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 13 #19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18, 6/28/18

Also #18 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13483

JUANITA M ROMERO

Chapter 13 #20.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

JUANITA M ROMERO Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13566

Marco Tulio Magana and Gloria Louisa Magana

Chapter 13 #21.00 Order to Show Cause Why Daniel King Should Not Be (2) Sanctioned; and (2) Ordered to Personally Appear at All Future Hearings

Also #22 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Marco Tulio Magana Represented By Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Gloria Louisa Magana Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13566

Marco Tulio Magana and Gloria Louisa Magana

Chapter 13 #22.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18, 7/19/18

Also #21 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Marco Tulio Magana Represented By Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Gloria Louisa Magana Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13742

Elizabeth Lucas

Chapter 13 #23.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elizabeth Lucas Represented By Steven A Wolvek

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13796

Charles Anthony Anunciation and Lisa Rhea Anunciation

Chapter 13 #24.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Charles Anthony Anunciation Represented By Jeffrey B Smith

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Rhea Anunciation Represented By Jeffrey B Smith

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13970

Vadany Sophan

Chapter 13 #25.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vadany Sophan Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14229

John Forest Harmon, Jr. and Margaret Anne Vieyra-

Chapter 13 #26.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Peter Najim Represented By

Ivan Trahan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14337

Jose Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13 #30.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Velasco Represented By

Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14388

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13 #31.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/19/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carlos Villegas Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Guadalupe Villegas Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14516

Gary Ray Osborn

Chapter 13 #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gary Ray Osborn Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14531

Juan Jose Gutierrez and Diane Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Jose Gutierrez Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Diane Gutierrez Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14541

Norma Hermosillo Hernandez

Chapter 13 #37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/5/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Norma Hermosillo Hernandez Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14553

Daniel Morales

Chapter 13 #38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Daniel Morales Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14603

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Chapter 13 #39.00 Motion for Setting Property Value re Creditor California Coast Credit Union Also #40 - #41

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

BACKGROUND

On May 31, 2018, Gabriel and Jeneke Blanco (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2012 Honda Accord (the "Accord"). On June 15, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion to Value the Accord ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

The Debtors assert that the Accord’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $8,331, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $9,285.31. In support the Debtor asserts that he consulted the Kelly Blue Book Report. However, a copy of the Kelly Blue Book report was not attached. Nor did the Debtors attach a certificate of title indicating the identity of the lienholder or a statement regarding the balance owed.

11:00 AM

CONT... Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Despite these issues, the Court notes that Proof of Claim 6-1 with respect to

Chapter 13

the Accord confirms that the Claimant agrees that the value of the Accord is $8,331. Thus, as the Court finds no dispute regarding the value of the collateral, the secured portion of the claim as determined to be $8,331. Moreover, based on Claim 6-1, the unsecured deficiency claim is $8,424.11.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as set forth above.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Joint Debtor(s):

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Movant(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14603

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Chapter 13 #40.00 Motion for Setting Property Value re Creditor Bank of the West Also #39 - #41

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

BACKGROUND

On May 31, 2018, Gabriel and Jeneke Blanco (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2015 Heartland North Trail Caliber Series M-33BKSS (the "RV"). On June 15, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion to Value the RV ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

The Debtors assert that the RV’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $24,575, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $5,047.70. In support the Debtor asserts that he consulted the NADA Guide. However, a copy of the NADA Guide report was not attached. Nor did the Debtors attach a Certificate of Title indicating the identity of the lienholder or a statement regarding the balance owed.

11:00 AM

CONT... Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco Chapter 13

As Claimant, Bank of the West, filed Proof of Claim No. 8-1, the Court can

overcome the necessity of a Certificate of Title or statement regarding the balance owed. However, to meet their evidentiary burden, the Debtors must provide admissible evidence of the NADA guide report they consulted to determine the value of the RV.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for Debtors to file and serve a supplemental Debtor declaration providing evidence of the NADA guide report consulted to establish fair market value.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Joint Debtor(s):

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Movant(s):

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14603

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Chapter 13 #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Also #39 - #40

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Joint Debtor(s):

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14611

Richard Caraveo, Jr.

Chapter 13 #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

David Sandoval Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Joint Debtor(s):

Mary Celine Sandoval Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-11597

Taylor J. Bretz

Chapter 13 #46.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 210

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Taylor J. Bretz Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-20757

Robert A Ausler and Marie A Galloway

Chapter 13 #47.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 124

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Robert A Ausler Represented By James T Lillard

Joint Debtor(s):

Marie A Galloway Represented By James T Lillard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-13535

Gilbert Alfred Torrez, Sr. and Emily Torrez

Chapter 13 #48.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 60

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7-31- 18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilbert Alfred Torrez Sr. Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Emily Torrez Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-13609

Steven Lee Gardner and Jennifer Ann Gardner

Chapter 13 #49.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 168

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Steven Lee Gardner Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Ann Gardner Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-11652

Janel M Faulks

Chapter 13 #50.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Janel M Faulks Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-16263

Tanyua A Gates-Holmes

Chapter 13 #51.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Tanyua A Gates-Holmes Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #52.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 154

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/25/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18009

Carlos Garcia

Chapter 13 #53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 104

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18248

Juan Jose Franco

Chapter 13 #54.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 86

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Idalia Temblador-Baisa Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13 #58.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 96

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7-31- 18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-11456

Jose Alberto Lara-Pena and Yanisleidy Sanchez-Quinonez

Chapter 13 #59.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 71

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Alberto Lara-Pena Represented By Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Yanisleidy Sanchez-Quinonez Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-13607

Fernando Ramos

Chapter 13 #60.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 68

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Fernando Ramos Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-15347

Susan Violet Guillot

Chapter 13 #61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Dana Travis

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13 #62.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-18669

Hector Rene Flores, Jr. and Mayra Cecilia Canchola

Chapter 13 #66.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Hector Rene Flores Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang

Joint Debtor(s):

Mayra Cecilia Canchola Vasquez Represented By

Kevin Tang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10741

Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical

Chapter 13 #67.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10852

Gilberto Linares

Chapter 13 #68.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

8/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilberto Linares Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-11050

Manuel Garcia Marquez and Susan Louise Marquez

Chapter 13 #69.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Manuel Garcia Marquez Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Susan Louise Marquez Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#70.00 Status Conference RE: Counterclaim [19] Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint to Determine Dischargeability Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) and COUNTERCLAIM of Shatara Adrienne Thompson for Defamation, Counterclaim by Robert Lee Thompson Jr, Shatara Adrienne Thompson against Beatriz M Gutierrez

Also #71 EH

Docket 19

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/29/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Defendant(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl

Joint Debtor(s):

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Plaintiff(s):

Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#71.00 CONT Status conference on Complaint filed on 3-1-18 to Determine Dischargeability of Debt Pursuant to 11 USC 523(a)(6)

From: 5/3/18 Also #70

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 8/29/18 AT 2:00 PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Defendant(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl

Joint Debtor(s):

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Plaintiff(s):

Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:18-15998

Sheikh Azeem Akhtar

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 14047 Blue Ash Ct, Eastvale CA 92880

MOVANT: SHEIKH AZEEM AKHTAR

CASE DISMISSED 8/7/18

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sheikh Azeem Akhtar Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

1:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7 #2.00 Motion for Order Approving Compromise of Controversy Between Larry D. Simons, Chapter 7 Trustee, and Debtor Jose Antonio Hernandez and Defendant Carolina Villalobos Navarro

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling:

8/14/2018

On July 12, 2018, the Chapter 7 Trustee filed its Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 [Dkt. No. 23]. On August 2, 2018, the Court issued an order [Dkt. No. 26], setting the matter for hearing, and requiring Trustee to submit a supplemental declaration containing evidence of the value of the property sufficient to allow the Court to properly evaluate the motion.

On August 8, 2018, Trustee filed a supplemental declaration [Dkt. No. 30]. The Court having reviewing the contents of the motion and the supplemental declaration, notice being proper and no opposition having been filed, the Court finds that the compromise has satisfied the A&C Property factors. Therefore, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

1:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Frank X Ruggier

Chapter 7

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #3.00 CONT Motion by Debtor to Sell Substantially All Assets of Debtor Free and Clear of Liens

From: 7/24/18 Also #4 & #5 EH

Docket 328

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/18

BACKGROUND

$250,000 in a cash payment to be predominantly used for payment of administrative

1:00 PM

CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

claims. Debtor estimates that the Assets have a fair market value of $3,160,000.

DISCUSSION

Notice
FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(a) provides: "Notice of a proposed use, sale, or lease of property, than cash collateral, not in the ordinary course of business shall be given pursuant to Rule 2002(a)(2), (c)(1), (i), and (k) and, if applicable, in accordance with § 363(b)(2) of the Code." FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 2002(a)(2) requires the Motion to be served on all creditors, which does not appear to have been done here. Specifically, the Court notes that the petition in the instant case identifies 111 parties to receive notice, however, the Motion appears to have been served on substantially less than half that many entities.
Fair Market Value and Marketing

Local Rule 6004-(1)(c)(2)(A) provides that the Motion "must be supported by a declaration of the movant establishing the value of the property and that the terms and conditions of the proposed sale, including the price and all contingencies, are in the best interest of the estate." While the Motion does include a declaration of Debtor’s principal establishing a fair market value of $3.16 million, the Motion does not include any breakdown of that valuation or the comparables upon which the valuation was based. Additionally, the old adage that "value is what someone is willing to pay" is pertinent here. Section III.G of the Motion suggests that the marketing effort was possibly inadequate, and tardy at best. Specifically, the future tense verbiag of the section indicates that Debtor did not engage in any marketing prior to filing the motion. Debtor also stated it would file a supplement seven days before the sale
1:00 PM
CONT...

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11
hearing, however, such supplement was only filed the morning before the hearing, depriving the Court of ample time to review the submitted evidence. Additionally, Debtor did not submit the "due diligence package" it allegedly used in marketing. Finally, the late supplement filed indicates in paragraph 14 that a potential buyer has not yet rendered a decision on whether to overbid. Ultimately, in light of the evidence presented to the Court, the Court is unable to conclude that the rushed marketing effort is inadequate in light of the unusual and complex nature of the sale under consideration.
Miscellaneous Issues

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

1:00 PM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #4.00 CONT Motion by Debtor to Assume, Assign, and Establish Cure Amounts For Certain Executory Contracts And Unexpired Leases

From: 7/24/18 Also #3 & #5 EH

Docket 354

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

1:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #5.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18, 7/10/18, 7/24/18 Also #3 & #4

Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Hearing Room

303

2:00 PM

6:17-13012

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al

#1.00 CONT Status conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01138. Complaint to Determine Non-Dischargeability of Debt by Phillip Musharbash , Violette Musharbash against Issa M Musharbbash , Amal Musharbbash

From: 9/20/17, 2/7/18, 3/7/18 EH

Docket 1

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Defendant(s):

Issa M Musharbash Pro Se

Amal Musharbash Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

MOVANT: PAUL SHELDON KIRKWOOD

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

The Court having review Debtor’s motion, and finding that the presumption of bad faith under 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(C) does not arise in this case, and there being no opposition to the motion under consideration, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and CONTINUE the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Paul Sheldon Kirkwood Represented By Michael E Clark

Movant(s):

Paul Sheldon Kirkwood Represented By Michael E Clark

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16178

Eriberto A. Sandoval

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Personal

MOVANT: ERIBERTO SANDOVAL

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

The Court having review Debtor’s motion to continue the automatic stay, and finding sufficient cause to rebut the presumption of bad faith imposed by 11 U.S.C. § 362(c) (3)(C), the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and CONTINUE the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eriberto A. Sandoval Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Eriberto A. Sandoval Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15709

Michael Ray Augusta and Irma Jean Augusta

Chapter 7 #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 NISSAN VERSA, VIN: 3N1C N7AP 8GL8 28865 .

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael Ray Augusta Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Irma Jean Augusta Represented By Dana Travis

Movant(s):

MECHANICS BANK, a California Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Michael Ray Augusta and Irma Jean Augusta

Vincent V Frounjian

Chapter 7

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15617

Juan Vargas and Anabely E Vargas

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: Three 2012 Utility refrigerated trailers with 2011 Thermo King SB2l0 refrigeration units, VINs: 1UYVS2532CU255889, IUYVS2534CU255893 and 1UYVS2537CU255810 .

MOVANT: BMO HARRIS BANK NA

Docket 14

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/26/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Vargas Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Anabely E Vargas Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

BMO HARRIS BANK N.A. Represented By

Raffi Khatchadourian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15512

Santiago Hernandez and Maria J Garcia Hernandez

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Ford F150, VIN 1FTEW1CG1FKE30751

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Santiago Hernandez Represented By Luis Aguilar

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria J Garcia Hernandez Represented By Luis Aguilar

Movant(s):

Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By

Sheryl K Ith

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Santiago Hernandez and Maria J Garcia Hernandez

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15284

Adonis Francisco

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40215 Buckwood Way, Murrieta, CA 92562

MOVANT DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS AS TRUSTEE

Also #7 EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/14/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adonis Francisco Pro Se

Movant(s):

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15284

Adonis Francisco

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8855 Tamberly Way, Unit #D, Santee, CA 92071

MOVANT: CU MEMBERS MORTGAGE

Also #6 EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(4), based on unauthorized transfers of interest. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under

¶¶ 2 and 3.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adonis Francisco Pro Se

Movant(s):

CU Members Mortgage Represented By Edward A. Treder Darlene C Vigil

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Adonis Francisco

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15178

Shelly Lynn Agnoletto

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2014 Buick Verano Vin # 1G4PP5SK5E4177872)

MOVANT: ALLY FINANCIAL INC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Shelly Lynn Agnoletto Represented By Daniel King

Movant(s):

Ally Financial Inc. Represented By Adam N Barasch

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15162

Mourence Eugene Burris

Chapter 7 #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 36405 Flower Basket Rd, Winchester CA 92596

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mourence Eugene Burris Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15115

Kevin DeShawn Fowler

Chapter 7 #10.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15125 Stable Lane, Victorville, CA 92394

MOVANT: MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS OF COLORADO LLC

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 13.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kevin DeShawn Fowler Represented By Stephen D Brittain

Movant(s):

Mortgage Solutions of Colorado, Represented By

Daniel K Fujimoto Caren J Castle

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14774

Jose Luis B. Guerrero

Chapter 7 #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6927 Cypress Grove Dr., Riverside, CA 92506

MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB

Docket 23

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because this is a Chapter 7 proceeding and, therefore, that section is inapplicable. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Luis B. Guerrero Represented By Gary S Saunders

Movant(s):

Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By

Kristin A Zilberstein

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14757

Jason Ortega and Sally Michelle Ortega

Chapter 7 #12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Ford Flex, VIN 2FMGK5B80FBA09972

MOVANT: CAB WEST LLC

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jason Ortega Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Sally Michelle Ortega Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Cab West LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Jason Ortega and Sally Michelle Ortega

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14300

Hector Comparan Sarabia

Chapter 7 #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3010 Wollyleaf Ct Perris, Califronia 92571

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA NA

Docket 22

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Hector Comparan Sarabia Pro Se

Movant(s):

Bank of America, N.A. Represented By

Diana Torres-Brito

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta

10:00 AM

6:18-14283

Jennifer A. Lawton

Chapter 7 #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32081, Rosemary St, Winchester, CA 92596

MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES LLC

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jennifer A. Lawton Represented By Steven E Cowen

Movant(s):

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC Represented By Kelsey X Luu Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13906

Ruby Lee Frazier

Chapter 13 #15.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 BMW X1 Utility 4D 28i AWD

MOVANT: FINANCIAL SERVICE VEHICLE TRUST

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ruby Lee Frazier Represented By Michael R Totaro

Movant(s):

Financial Services Vehicle Trust Represented By

Cheryl A Skigin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13117

Gonzalo Aguilar and Diane Vick

Chapter 7 #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5710 Dairy Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90805

MOVANT: U.S. BANK, N.A.

Docket 26

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/20/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gonzalo Aguilar Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Diane Vick Pro Se

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank, N.A., successor trustee to Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12170

Pamela Ann Harris

Chapter 13 #17.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Honda Accord

MOVANT: FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION

From: 7/24/18 EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-11636

Amanuel Montrell Bradberry and Katrina Lashall

Chapter 13 #18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Hyundai Sonata .

MOVANT: CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES INC

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: STIPULATED APO ENTERED 8/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Amanuel Montrell Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders

Joint Debtor(s):

Katrina Lashall Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders

Movant(s):

Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc. Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-11128

Gilbert D Olivares

Chapter 13 #19.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Camaro, VIN: 1G1FA1RX0G0189667

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES INC dba GM FINANCIAL

Docket 32

* VACATED * REASON: STIPULATED APO ENTERED 8/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilbert D Olivares Represented By Scott Kosner

Movant(s):

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10883

Alexander Joo

Chapter 7 #20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 7335 Laurel Ave, Fontana, CA 92335

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC dba MR COOPER

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

and (4). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because this is a Chapter 7 proceeding. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 10. DENY requests under ¶¶ 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown. DENY request under ¶ 14 because it does not request any relief.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Alexander Joo Pro Se
Movant(s):
The Bank of New York Mellon Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-10127

David H Yopp

Chapter 7

#21.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9823 Willowbrook Road, Riverside, CA 92509

MOVANT: HSBC BANK NATIONAL ASSOC AS TRUSTEE FOR WELLS FARGO ASSET SECURITIES CORP, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH

EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay as moot because this case has been converted to Chapter 7. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David H Yopp Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
Armin M Kolenovic Jamie D Hanawalt
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

David H Yopp

Chapter 7
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20372

Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson

Chapter 13

#22.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 34299 Lamborn St Temecula, CA 92592 Under 11 U.S.C. § 362

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 49
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/10/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Anna C. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
George E. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
Armin M Kolenovic Dane W Exnowski
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15809

Beatrice A Diaz

Chapter 7

#23.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 21 Del Brienza, Lake Elsinore, CA 92532

MOVANT: REO PROPERTIES GROUP, INC.; ALLCITY REAL ESTATE INC.

EH

Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:
8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court notes that the subject real property was abandoned by Trustee pursuant to the "Notice of Proposed Abandonment of Property of the Estate" [Dkt. No. 32]. The Court notes that the motion requests confirmation that no stay is in effect.

11 U.S.C. § 362(a) outlines the scope of the automatic stay. The eight enumerated categories of actions stayed fall into two categories: (1) actions against property of the estate; (2) and actions to enforce a prepetition interest or collect on a prepetition claim. Notably, the automatic stay does not bar the enforcement of a postpetition interest or claim when such enforcement action does not involve property of the bankruptcy estate.

Here, the real property at issue was abandoned by Trustee and is, therefore, not property of the bankruptcy estate. Movant is the purchaser of the real property at a postpetition Trustee’s sale and, therefore, Movant’s interest in the real property did not arise prepetition and could not have been enforced prepetition. As a result, none of the categories of stayed acts outlined in § 362(a) are applicable to this situation.

Pursuant to the above, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request in ¶ 3 and confirm that the automatic stay was never in effect with regard to Movant and the subject
10:00 AM
CONT...

Beatrice A Diaz

Chapter 7
matter of the motion. All other requests in the motion are DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Beatrice A Diaz Pro Se
Movant(s):
REO PROPERTIES GROUP, INC.; Represented By
Stephen C Duringer
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
Anthony A Friedman
10:00 AM
6:17-15475

Shane Morgan

Chapter 13

#24.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 124 Lansing St., Eaton Rapids, Michigan 48827

MOVANT: SETERUS, INC

EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Shane Morgan Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By James F Lewin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15100

Kingpouangphet Sangasy and Keooudone Phrakousonh

Chapter 13

#25.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 29976 Via Puesta Del Sol, Temecula, CA 92591

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

EH

Docket 28
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 7/31/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Kingpouangphet Sangasy Represented By James T Lillard
Joint Debtor(s):
Keooudone Phrakousonh Represented By James T Lillard
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By John Chandler Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-12748

William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez

Chapter 7

#26.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: 2013 Ford Flex, VIN 2FMGK5D8XDBD09383

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY

EH

Docket 127
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
William A. Mendez II Represented By Thomas J Polis
Joint Debtor(s):
Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis
Movant(s):
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
Sheryl K Ith Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith Carmela Pagay
10:00 AM
6:17-12700

Eugene Alexis Padilla

Chapter 13

#27.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 420 Fenmore Drive, Barstow, CA 92311

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:
8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Eugene Alexis Padilla Represented By John F Brady
Movant(s):
Freedom Mortgage Corporation, its Represented By
Kristin A Zilberstein Merdaud Jafarnia Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-14868

Richard M. Orellano, II and Tifany Orellano

Chapter 13

#28.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2013 Hyundai Elantra Vin # 5NPDH4AE6DH366954)

MOVANT: ALLY FINANCIAL INC

EH

Docket 65
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/3/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard M. Orellano II Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Joint Debtor(s):
Tifany Orellano Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Movant(s):
Ally Financial Inc. Represented By Adam N Barasch
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-12982

Edward A. Moore, Jr. and Carole Moore

Chapter 13

#29.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 27581 Graystone Ln, Murrieta, CA 92563

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 86
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
8/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Edward A. Moore Jr. Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Carole Moore Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
U.S. BANK NATIONAL Represented By DeMarcus Jones Kelsey X Luu
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-12191

Valicia LaShawn Fennell

Chapter 13

#30.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1330 W 30TH ST San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK

From: 6/5/18, 7/10/18 EH
Docket 66
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
8/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Valicia LaShawn Fennell Pro Se
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By
Dane W Exnowski
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-10048

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13

#31.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3300 Mary Ellen Dr, Riverside, California 92509-0816

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

From: 5/15/18, 6/26/18, 8/1/18 EH
Docket 66
Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
5/15/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court regarding extent of arrears and status of adequate protection discussions, if any.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Margaret Crain Represented By Yelena Gurevich
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt Jessica L Carter
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-16128

Delkys Hyde

Chapter 13

#32.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35571 Sugar Maple St Murrieta, CA 92563

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

From: 4/24/18, 6/5/18, 7/24/18 EH
Docket 41
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL FILED 7/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

On March 29, 2018, Debtor filed a Motion for Authority to Sell the Property. Debtor has indicated that he intends to pay off the Movant and remainder of the chapter 13 plan through escrow. The Trustee has recommended approval of the sale. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for 30 days for Debtor to finalize sale.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Delkys Hyde Represented By
David L Nelson
Movant(s):
Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Bonni S Mantovani
S Renee Sawyer Blume Alexander G Meissner
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Delkys Hyde

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-15840

Omar Edwin Rivera

Chapter 13

#33.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28864 Pasito Street, Nuevo, CA 92567

MOVANT: MIDFIRST BANK

EH

Docket 50

Tentative Ruling:
8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Omar Edwin Rivera Represented By Rhonda Walker
Movant(s):
MidFirst Bank Represented By Mary Jane Sarne
Joseph C Delmotte Kelsey X Luu Nancy L Lee
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Omar Edwin Rivera

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-14652

Donald Ray Eskridge

Chapter 13

#34.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14798 Ladybird Lane, Victorville, CA 92394

MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC

From: 6/20/18, 7/24/18 EH
Docket 53
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/2/18 AT 10:00 AM.
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Donald Ray Eskridge Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
PennyMac Loan Services, LLC Represented By John D Schlotter
Karrollanne K Cayce Christina J O
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:14-24084

Michael Lee Barnes and Belinda Ann Barnes

Chapter 13

#35.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 25917 Fran Lou Drive, Moreno Valley, CA 92557

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

EH

Docket 114
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/10/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michael Lee Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Belinda Ann Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Movant(s):
  DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
  Leslie M Klott Sheereen Middleton Sean C Ferry
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:14-12516
  
  John Alexander Jay
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #36.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 45 Camino Real, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
  
  MOVANT: MTGLQ INVESTORS LP
  
  From: 7/24/18 EH
  Docket 200
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/15/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  TENTATIVE RULING:
  
  7/24/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Debtor’s confirmed plan provided for Debtor to surrender his interest in the real property at issue, and the plan does not treat Movant’s claim. Therefore, as to Debtor, Movant has established cause for relief from the automatic stay.
  
  As to Movant’s request for relief from the co-debtor stay, the Court notes that the co- debtor at issue here, Debtor’s former spouse, appears to have been served with the motion and failed to file opposition, which the Court can deem consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h). More importantly, 11 U.S.C. §1301(c)
provides that the Court must grant relief from the co-debtor stay if "the plan filed by the debtor proposes not to pay such claim." Therefore, relief from the co-debtor stay is appropriate.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
10:00 AM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

John Alexander Jay

Chapter 13
John Alexander Jay Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
MTGLQ Investors, LP Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#37.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and
(2) Requiring Status Report EH
Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
  2:00 PM
  6:18-12807
  
  G Hurtado Construction, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #38.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 5/8/18 EH
  Docket 18
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10155
  
  Jose De Jesus Hernandez
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #39.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3095 Ocelot Circle, Corona, CA 92882
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
  
  From: 7/24/18 EH
  Docket 71
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  7/24/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶ 2,3, and 12.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By
  Eric Bensamochan
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Austin P Nagel
  2:00 PM
  6:16-19993
  
  B & B Family, Incorporated
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #40.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
  
  From: 12/13/16, 3/7/17, 5/30/17, 7/25/17, 9/26/17, 10/31/17, 11/7/17, 5/15/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01109 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Titanium Resource Company,
  
  #41.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 - preference,13 Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer
  
  From: 7/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a Represented By
  Alan W Forsley
  Plaintiff(s):
  David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01110 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Larson, D.C., an individual
  
  #42.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against John Larson, D.C., an individual. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers, Avoidance of Improper Distributions, and Unjust Enrichment and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13- Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer
  
  From: 7/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  John Larson, D.C., an individual Represented By
  Alan W Forsley
  Plaintiff(s):
  David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01111 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. American Express Company, a
  
  #43.00 Status Conference RE: 3rd Party Complaint [4] Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint, and Third-Party Claim Against John C. Larson, Third-Party Complaint by American Express Company, a New York Corporation dba American Express, American Express Travel Related Services, Inc., a New York corporation dba American Express against John C. Larson
  
  EH
  
  Docket 4
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  American Express Company, a New Pro Se American Express Travel Related Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01111 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. American Express Company, a
  
  #44.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01111. Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against American Express Company, a New York Corporation dba American Express, American Express Travel Related Services, Inc., a New York corporation dba American Express. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Werth, Steven)
  
  From: 7/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  American Express Company, a New Pro Se American Express Travel Related Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01112 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Source Medical Billing &
  
  #45.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Source Medical Billing & Collection, Inc, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))
  
  From: 7/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
  Defendant(s):
  Source Medical Billing & Pro Se
  Plaintiff(s):
  David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
  Trustee(s):
  David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Steven Werth
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:16-14273
  
  Allied Injury Management, Inc.
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:18-01113 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Netreva, Inc., a California
  
  #46.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01113. Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Netreva, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)) (Werth, Steven)
  
  From: 7/10/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Debtor(s):

Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
Netreva, Inc., a California Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
Plaintiff(s):
David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11
2:00 PM
6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

#47.00 Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement Also #48
EH

Docket 78
Tentative Ruling:
8/21/18
1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
  
  On January 26, 2018, Markus Boyd ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On February 13, 2018, the Court entered an interim order approving use of cash collateral. On March 6, 2018, the Court entered orders (1) authorizing Debtor to provide adequate assurance of payment to utility service providers and; (2) approving a budget. On March 26, 2018, the Court authorized the employment of Nicholas Gebelt as counsel for Debtor. On April 26, 2018, the Court disallowed four claims of American Express (claim numbers 2 and 4-6).
  
  On June 22, 2018, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan. On August 7, 2018, UST filed a limited objection to Debtor’s disclosure statement.
2. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
  
  In addition to the disclosure statement, the following exhibits are included: (1)
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  "Treatment of Claims/Interests" (Exhibit A); (2) "Executory Contracts & Unexpired Leases" (Exhibit B); (3) "Cash Flow Projections" (Exhibit C); (4) "Recent Financial History" (Exhibit D); (5) "Secured Claims" (Exhibit E); (6) "General Unsecured Claims, in Class 4A or 4B" (Exhibit F); "Liquidating Analysis" (Exhibit G); "Endnotes/Continuation Sheets" (which includes a supplement) (Exhibit H). Debtor has used the Court’s optional disclosure statement form and worksheets, and, therefore, the format of the disclosure statement is adequate.
  
  The Chapter 11 Plan’s proposed effective date is October 21, 2018. There are four classes of claims and four listed categories of unclassified claims1:
  1. Class 1: Arrears secured by real property -- $174,971.67 claim, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months. Debtor’s Exhibit A contains a row for arrears on the second and third deeds of trust, but does not identify any amount owing.
  2. Class 2: Additional claims secured by real property – Debtor lists three different claims within this class. Debtor proposes to continue paying his mortgage (identified as $772,733.45)2, over 230 months and at 2% interest. Debtor proposes to cure his delinquency on HOA dues over 60 months. Debtor has included a row for, presumably, future HOA dues but no amount is listed. Nor is it clear that this class is truly unimpaired.
  3. Class 3: Priority claims: Debtor’s plan does not list any claims in class 3
  4. Class 4: General Unsecured – $45,151.20, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months.
    1. Type 1: UST fees ($650) – paid in full on effective date
    2. Type 2: Taxes (IRS) – approximately $80k, paid over 51 months
    3. Type 3: Taxes (FTB) –$5,651.86, paid over 51 months
    4. Type 4: Nicholas Gebelt’s fees ($30k)—paid in full on effective date
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Markus Anthony Boyd
    5. Type 5: Accountant’s fees – none listed
3. LEGAL ANALYSIS

A. Adequate Information

Chapter 11

A Chapter 11 disclosure statement is required to contain "adequate information" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1125(b). Section 1125(f)(2) provides that: "the court may approve a disclosure statement submitted on standard forms approved by the court or adopted under section 2075 of title 28." The Central District of California has devised a disclosure statement template, Form 3017-1.CH11.DISCLSR.STMT, which Debtor generally adopted as to format.

As to the substance of a disclosure statement, 11 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1) defines "adequate information" as:

information of a kind, and in sufficient detail as far as is reasonably practicable in light of the nature and history of the debtor and the condition of the debtor’s books and records, including a discussion of the potential material Federal tax consequences of the plan to the debtor, any successor to the debtor, and a hypothetical investor typical of the holders of claims or interests in the case, that would enable such a hypothetical investor of the relevant class to make an informed judgment about the plan, but adequate information need not include such information about any other possible or proposed plan and in determining whether a disclosure statement provides adequate information, the court shall consider the complexity of the case, the benefit of additional information to creditors and other parties in interest, and the cost of providing additional information

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

The type of information required varies with the circumstances. See, e.g., In re Jeppson, 66 B.R. 269, 292 (Bankr. D. Utah 1986) (listing nineteen categories of information commonly required); see also In re Malek, 35 B.R. 443, 443-44 (Bankr.

E.D. Mich. 1983) (listing minimum requirements).

While Debtor has utilized Court approved forms and has clearly delineated the treatment of the varying claims, the disclosure statement simply lacks the information necessary to evaluate Debtor’s financial situation and determine the probability of the plan’s success. First of all, as noted by UST, Debtor’s practice appears to have been not to withhold taxes on earned income. Second of all, the limited financial information provided by Debtor indicates his income fluctuates drastically. The four months of "recent financial history" (Exhibit D) including in the disclosure statement note the following monthly receipts:

1) $4,559 (February) (the corresponding monthly operating report lists receipts of

$51.89)

2) $32,591 (March)

3) $15,541 (April)

4) $35,626 (May)

Additionally, a monthly operating report for June, filed after the disclosure statement, identifies receipts in the amount of $1,801.11. The limited financial history provided supports UST’s assertion that: "Debtor’s tax liabilities are a significant risk factor given that the monthly operating reports reflect that the Debtor averages between

$18-$19,000 in monthly net income – much less than the $30,000 reported in the Disclosure Statement’s cash flow projections." Indeed, using that $18-$19,000 figure, if one assumes that the receipts are before tax and that Debtor will ultimately be unsuccessful in the pending adversary proceeding, it would appear that the proposed plan may be infeasible. In any event, the financial information provided in the disclosure statement is grossly inadequate for an evaluation of the prospects of the proposed plan. The information simply does not allow for a reasonably accurate estimation of Debtor’s income and expenses moving forward.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Movant(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11 #48.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 3/20/18 Also #47

Docket 16

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

10:00 AM

6:18-11992

Sharon R. Walters

Chapter 7 #1.00 CONT Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and JPMorgan Chase Bank NA Re: 2015 Chrysler 200

From: 7/11/18 EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sharon R. Walters Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13433

Ashley Rico

Chapter 7 #2.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Wells Fargo Dealer Services re 2011 Hyundai Sonata

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

Brianna Lee Phye Represented By Christopher L Hoglin

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15144

Rose Marie Kelly

Chapter 7 #7.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and VW Credit Inc re 2013 Volkswagen Jetta

Also #8 EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rose Marie Kelly Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15144

Rose Marie Kelly

Chapter 7 #8.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Gateway One Lending & Finance Re: 2012 Ford Truck F150 Pickup Supercrew FX2 2WD.

Also #7 EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rose Marie Kelly Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15388

Cabrini Haynes

Chapter 7 #9.00 Order to show cause re dismissal for failure to comply with rule 1006(B) - Installments

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Cabrini Haynes Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-19150

Charles David Arthur and Claire Bigornia Blanza Arthur

Chapter 7 #10.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

Trustee Fees:	$6,083.61
Trustee Expenses:	$425.47
Accountant Fees:	$2,890.50
Accountant Costs:	$390.30
Attorney Fees:	$4,353.50
Attorney Costs:	$1,796.34

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles David Arthur Represented By Anerio V Altman

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charles David Arthur and Claire Bigornia Blanza Arthur

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Claire Bigornia Blanza Arthur Represented By Anerio V Altman

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Rika Kido

11:00 AM

6:17-19529

Daniel J. Clark and Sheryl J. Clark

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Final Report of the Trustee has been set for hearing on sufficient notice. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 362.25 Trustee Expenses: $ 29.40

The Final Report is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Daniel J. Clark Represented By Timothy S Huyck

Joint Debtor(s):

Sheryl J. Clark Represented By Timothy S Huyck

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Daniel J. Clark and Sheryl J. Clark

Chapter 7

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-15809

Beatrice A Diaz

Chapter 7 #12.00 Order Setting for Hearing on Motion to Convert Case from Chapter 7 to 13 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Beatrice A Diaz Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy

Anthony A Friedman

11:00 AM

6:18-15038

Maria E Sanchez

Chapter 7 #13.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Maria E Sanchez Pro Se

Movant(s):

Maria E Sanchez Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-23186

Richard C Cox, Jr

Chapter 7 #14.00 Motion for Turnover of Insurance Renewal Commissions EH

Docket 150

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard C Cox Jr Represented By Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #15.00 Motion to Disallow Claims No. 10 filed by Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. as Not Allowable Against Estate

Also #16 - #20

Docket 108

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On September 8, 2015, the Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC ("Debtor") case was filed as an involuntary case. The Order for Relief was entered on November 13, 2015. John P. Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 10 ("Claim") of Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it is for services rendered to MCG Development, which is an entity that is not the Debtor and therefore is not entitled to allowance as a claim. The Objection was properly served and no opposition or response has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, the Trustee has pointed to facts tending to defeat the claim by virtue of the fact that Claimant’s own supporting documentation evinces a contractual relationship with Paul Minnick as representative of MCG Development Company, Inc., not on behalf of the Debtor. Absent evidence of a relationship between the Debtor and Claimant, the Claimant has failed to establish the existence of a claim against the Debtor’s estate.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection and DISALLOW Claim No. 10 in

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #16.00 Motion to Disallow Claims No. 1 filed by Milligan Beswick Levine & Knox, LLP as Not Allowable Against the Estate

Also #15 - #20

Docket 98

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/3/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #17.00 Motion to Allow Claim 3 filed by San Bernardino County Tax Collector as Fully Secured, Not Entitled to a Dividend

Also #15 - #20

Docket 100

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 3 ("Claim") of San Bernardino Tax Collector (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is fully secured and not entitled to a dividend from the Estate.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

TENTATIVE RULING

The supporting documentation indicates that the Claim is secured by vacant land in San Bernardino County. The Trustee requests that the Claim be allowed as fully secured but not entitled to a dividend from the estate. Based on the lack of prejudice to the Claimant and the Claimant’s failure to file response or opposition which this Court deems as consent pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and ALLOW the Claim as a fully secured claim not entitled to a dividend.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Gaurav Datta

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #18.00 Motion to Allow Claim 7 filed by Norman A. Musselman as Fully Secured, Not Entitled to a Dividend

Also #15 - #20

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 7 ("Claim") of Norman Musselman (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is fully secured and not entitled to a dividend from the Estate.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Claim indicates that it is secured by a Recorded Deed of Trust and Note and that the fair market value of the Property at issue exceeds the amount of the Claim such that it is fully secured. The Trustee requests that the Claim be allowed as fully secured but not entitled to a dividend from the estate. Based on the lack of prejudice to the Claimant and the Claimant’s failure to file response or opposition which this Court deems as consent pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and ALLOW the Claim as a fully secured claim not entitled to a dividend.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Gaurav Datta

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #19.00 Motion to Disallow Claims No. 8 filed by Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. as Not Allowable Against the Estate

Also #15 - #20

Docket 104

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/26/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #20.00 Motion to Disallow Claims No. 9 filed by Erwin L. Seifert as Not Allowable Against the Estate

Also #15 - #19

Docket 106

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 9 ("Claim") of Erwin L. Seifert (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it regards an employment contract between Claimant and MCG Development. The Objection was properly served and no opposition or response has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, the Trustee asserts that the Claim regards an employment contract between Claimant and MCG Development, not the Debtor. However, a separate Agreement dated May 27, 2014, between the Debtor and Claimant appears to indicate that although the employment contract was created between MDG Development and Claimant, the Debtor separately executed a Note and Deed of Trust in favor of Claimant to secure the obligations under the employment agreement in recognition that Claimant’s employment contract with MDG was "for the benefit of Manors …". (Objection at 18).

TENTATIVE RULING

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

Based on the Agreement between Debtor and Claimant, which the Trustee has not addressed, the Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Objection without prejudice on the basis that the Agreement appears to form a basis for enforcement of the Claim against the Debtor’s estate.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:13-27610

Baleine LP

Chapter 7 #21.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 1,5,8,11 by Claimant 1: Franchise Tax Board; Claimant 5: First Niagara Bank, NA; Claimant 8: First Niagara Bank, NA; Claimant 11: Franchise Tax Board

Also #22 & #23 EH

Docket 513

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its omnibus objection to Claim No. 1 and 11 of the Franchise Tax Board ("FTB") and to Claim No. 5 and 8 of First Niagara Bank ("FNB") on July 18, 2018 (the "Objection"). A response to the Objection was filed by FTB on August 8, 2018. On August 15, 2018, RFC filed its reply ("Reply"). FNB filed no opposition or response.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby

11:00 AM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

As a threshold matter, following the filing of Opposition by the FTB, RFC withdrew its Objection to the claims of the FTB in its Reply. The Objection is thus taken off calendar as to the FTB claims.

As to FNB, RFC has provided evidence to refute that FNB maintains any secured claims related to the real properties located at 1331 East Main Street, in Rochester, NY (the "Main Street Property") or 920 Winton Ave, in Rochester, NY (the "Winton Property") because the Baleine Trustee has sold these properties. FNB, for its part, received proper service and notice of the Objection but failed to respond or otherwise to amend its claim to indicate that following the sale anything remains of its claims. Here, given that RFC has provided evidence that the liens underlying Claims No. 5 and 8 were likely satisfied when the Main Street and Winton Properties were sold, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection as to these claims and disallow them in their entirety.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objections of RFC as to FNB, and DISALLOW Claims 5 and 8 of FNB in their entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Baleine LP Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr Sue-Ann L Tran

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

11:00 AM

6:13-27610

Baleine LP

Chapter 7 #22.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 4 by Claimant Home Depot Credit Services. and Request for Initial Status Conference

Also #21 & #23 EH

Docket 510

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

Given the lack of supporting documentation and failure of Home Depot to file opposition or response, which the Court deems as consent to the granting of the relief requested, pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Baleine LP Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr Sue-Ann L Tran

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

11:00 AM

6:13-27610

Baleine LP

Chapter 7 #23.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 2 by Claimant American Express Bank, FSB. and Request for Initial Status Conference

Also #21 & #22 EH

Docket 507

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its objection to Claim No. 2 of American Express Bank, FSB ("AMEX") on July 18, 2018 (the "Objection"). A response to the Objection was filed by the Chapter 7 trustee, Larry Simons ("Trustee") on August 8, 2018. On August 15, 2018, RFC filed its reply ("Reply").

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Chapter 7

Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

AMEX filed Claim No. 2, an unsecured debt totaling $4,768.94, for credit card charges on December 27, 2013. RFC objects to the claim on the following grounds:

There is insufficient supporting evidence to support the claim; and
The claim is likely an avoidable transfer.

RFC requests that pursuant to LBR 3007, the initial hearing be treated as a preliminary status conference to allow the parties with an opportunity to conduct discovery regarding disputed issues/facts.

The Trustee’s Limited Opposition is limited to pointing out the de minimis amount of Claim No. 2 and to request that the Court not permit an extended briefing schedule.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Baleine LP

Here, the Court finds that based on AMEX’s failure to file opposition or

Chapter 7

response, which the Court deems as consent to the granting of the relief requested pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), in addition to the insufficiency of the supporting documentation attached to the Claim, that the Objection should be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the forgoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Baleine LP Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr Sue-Ann L Tran

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay Todd A Frealy

11:00 AM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7 #24.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 5 by Claimant Frankel & Reichman, LLP. and Request for Initial Status Conference

Also #25 EH

Docket 974

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its objection to Claim No. 5 of Frankel & Reichman, LLP ("F&R") on July 18, 2018 (the "Objection"). A response to the Objection was filed by the Douglas Jay Roger ("Debtor") on August 8, 2018 ("Response").

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, based on the failure of F&R to file opposition or response which this Court deems as consent to the granting of the relief requested pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h).

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Objection is SUSTAINED in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr Sue-Ann L Tran Jeanne C Wanlass

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7 #25.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11,13,14,15,21,24 by Claimant 11: Internal Revenue Service; Claimant 13: Franchise Tax Board; Claimant 14: Internal Revenue Service; Claimant 15: Employment Development Dept.; Claimant 21: Danny Joe Coats; and Claimant 24: Kajan Mather & Barish Withdrawal of claim No. 14 Filed 8/8/18

Also #24 EH

Docket 969

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its omnibus objection on July 18, 2018 to the following claims:

Claim No. 15 of EDD for lack of evidence;
Claim No. 13 of the Franchise Tax Board ("FTB") for lack of evidence;
Claim No. 11-1 and 14 of the IRS for lack of evidence;
Claim No. 21 of Danny Coats as untimely; and
Claim No. 24 of Kajan Mather & Barish APC ("KMB") as untimely.

Responses to the Objection were filed by the Douglas Jay Roger ("Debtor"), the chapter 7 trustee, Helen Frazer ("Trustee"), and the United States of America ("IRS").

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

As a threshold matter, the Court agrees that the claims of Danny Coats and KMB were untimely filed after the February 25, 2014, deadline for filing proofs of claim. Additionally, neither party filed any opposition or response to the Objection. The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection disallowing Claim No. 21 and Claim

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

No. 24 in their entirety. Additionally, as to the IRS, Claim No. 14 has been withdrawn as of August 8, 2018. As to the FTB, the Court agrees with RFC that Claim No. 22 of the FTB supersedes Claim No. 13 and thus pursuant to FRBP 3007(d)(3), Claim No. 13 shall be disallowed in its entirety.

Claim No. 15-1 of the EDD filed by the Debtor has no prima facie validity as it attached no supporting documentation and is silent as to the amount owed and relevant time period covered. Debtor has indicated that it will be withdrawing Claim No. 15 if no response is filed by the EDD. No response has been filed by the EDD.

Finally, as to Claim No. 11 of the IRS, the IRS has filed an amended claim (Claim 11-2) and thus RFC’s objection regarding lack of evidence is moot. In its Reply, RFC requests that the Court stay proceedings on RFC’s Objection to Claim No. 11, require Roger and the IRS to liquidate Claim 11-2 in the tax court, and order the chapter 7 trustee to hold any proposed distributions that the trustee intends to make to the IRS. These requests are not properly before the Court and as such, the Court need not rule on them at this time.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection as to the following claims: Claim No. 21, Claim No. 24, and Claim No. 13. The Objection is OVERRULED as to Claim No. 11 and 14 as moot. Finally, as to Claim No. 15, the Objection is SUSTAINED based on the failure of EDD to file opposition or response which this Court deems as consent pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h) and based on the insufficiency of documentation.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr Sue-Ann L Tran Jeanne C Wanlass

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7 #26.00 Omnibus Objection by Revere Financial Corporation to Claim Number 6 by EDD; Claim Number 7 by State Board of Equalization; Claim Number 8 by FTB; and Claim Number 13 by KMB, because claims are untimely, lack evidence, and/or were satisfied/released/amended

Also #27 & #28 EH

Docket 697

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its omnibus objection on July 18, 2018 to the following claims:

Claim No. 6 of EDD for lack of evidence;
Claim No. 7 of the State Board of Equalization ("SBE") for lack of evidence;
Claim No. 8 of the Franchise Tax Board ("FTB") for lack of evidence; and
Claim No. 13 of Kajan, Mather, and Barish APC ("KMB") as untimely.

Response to the Objection was filed by the Douglas Jay Roger ("Debtor") on August 8, 2018.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a

Chapter 7

party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

As a threshold matter, the Court agrees that the claim of KMB, filed on 09/28/2016, after the July 20, 2015, claims bar date must be disallowed as time barred. The Objection is thus SUSTAINED as to Claim No. 13.

As to the remaining claims of the SBE, FTB, and EDD (collectively, the "Claimants"). The Debtor filed its claims having failed to attach any supporting

11:00 AM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

evidence, having failed to specify any amount, and having failed to provide even a relevant time period for amounts incurred. Moreover, as underscored by RFC, the Claimants have had several years to amend and supplement their claims. In its limited opposition to the Objection, the Debtors only evidence to support the claims is an amended IRS claim which purportedly supports an inference that the Debtor must also owe monies to the Claimants. Debtor then asks this Court to continue the hearing for 90 days for resolution of the IRS claim which Debtor insinuates will permit calculation of the Claimants’ claims. However, RFC makes a persuasive argument that Claimants filed no amendments following the IRS’s initial filing of its amended claim on April 17, 2015, and there is no evidence to support a finding that Claimants are likely to supplement their claims now. The Claimants were properly served with the Objection and have remained silent, which the Court deems as consent to the requested relief. Based on the lack of prima facie evidence of validity as to the claims, RFC’s Objection to the legal sufficiency of the claims is well taken and having failed to meet the Claimant’s ultimate burden. As such, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection as to Claimants and disallow Claim No.’s 6, 7 and 8 in their entirety.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Franklin R Fraley Jr

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7 #27.00 Preliminary Objection by Revere Financial Corporation to Proof of Claim Number 4 by Claimant American Express Bank, FSB. and Request for Initial Status Conference

Also #26 & #28 EH

Docket 694

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

Creditor Revere Financial Corporation ("RFC") filed its objection to Claim No. 4 of American Express Bank, FSB ("AMEX") on July 18, 2018 (the "Objection"). A response to the Objection was filed by AMEX on August 6, 2018. AMEX requests that the Court permit AMEX to withdraw its claim or, in the alternative, consents to the Objection being sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection based on AMEX’s consent.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Chapter 7

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

11:00 AM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7 #28.00 Status Conference re: Second Joint Motion and Moving Memorandum by Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation for Order Approving Settlement between Chapter 7 Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation

Also #26 & #27 EH

Docket 521

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01303 Cisneros v. AMERICAN EXPRESS

#29.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01303. Complaint by

A. Cisneros against AMERICAN EXPRESS. (Charge To Estate $350). For Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 6/11/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

AMERICAN EXPRESS Represented By Robert S Lampl Chad V Haes

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#30.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Misty Perry Isaacson

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01308 Cisneros v. BWI CONSULTING, LLC et al

#31.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01308. Complaint by

A. Cisneros against BWI CONSULTING, LLC, Black and White, Inc., BLACK AND WHITE BILLING COMPANY, BLACK AND WHITE INK, MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 7/27/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 6/11/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/28/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

BWI CONSULTING, LLC Pro Se

Black and White, Inc. Pro Se

BLACK AND WHITE BILLING Pro Se

BLACK AND WHITE INK Pro Se

MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01309 Cisneros v. DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN

#32.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01309. Complaint by

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#33.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Amended Complaint (First) by Revere Financial Corporation and Jerry Wang, as State-Court Appointed Receiver by Franklin R Fraley Jr on behalf of Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation against Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-8)

From: 4/25/18, 6/13/18 EH

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/31/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Jerry Wang Represented By

Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano

A. Cisneros Represented By

Chad V Haes

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

D Edward Hays

Chapter 7

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01199 Revere Financial Corporation v. Bank of Southern California, N.A.

#34.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [60] Amended Complaint (Third) by Franklin R Fraley Jr on behalf of Revere Financial Corporation against Bank of Southern California, N.A.. (Fraley, Franklin)

From: 7/11/18 EH

Docket 60

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Bank of Southern California, N.A. Represented By

Kathryn M.S. Catherwood

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-30625

John Martin Mata

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01089 Mata et al v. National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1 et a

#35.00 CONT-Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01089. Complaint by John Martin Mata, Livier Mata against National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1, NATIONAL COLLEGIATE STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2006-4, National

Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2007-1. (Charge To Estate) - Filing Fee Not Required. Determination of Discharge Under 11 U.S.C. Sect 523(a)(8) Nature of Suit: 63 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(8), student loan, 91 - Declaratory judgment

From: 6/27/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John Martin Mata Represented By Michael E Clark

Defendant(s):

National Collegiate Student Loan Represented By

Damian P Richard

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE Represented By Damian P Richard

National Collegiate Student Loan Represented By

Damian P Richard

Joint Debtor(s):

Livier Mata Represented By

Michael E Clark

2:00 PM

CONT...

John Martin Mata

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

John Martin Mata Represented By Michael E Clark Austin C Smith

Livier Mata Represented By

Michael E Clark Austin C Smith

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01096 Pringle v. Bank of the West

#36.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01096. Complaint by John Pringle against Bank of the West. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 544(b)( and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05; (2) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B); (3) Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; and (4) Disallowance of Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502 Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Goe, Robert)

From: 6/27/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 8/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III

Defendant(s):

Bank of the West Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

John Pringle Represented By

Robert P Goe

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

2:00 PM

6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.

#37.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment From: 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 4/11/18, 6/13/18

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Defendant(s):

Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang

Joint Debtor(s):

Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Movant(s):

Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang

Plaintiff(s):

Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido

2:00 PM

6:17-15043

Sandra Lou Harter

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01040 Cisneros v. Harter et al

#38.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by A. Cisneros against Joseph Harter, Connie Flach, John Rose, Tammy Rose, Brennan Rose, KayLynne Rose. (Charge To Estate - $350.00) .- Complaint for: 1) Declaratory Relief; 2) Turnover of Property; and 3) Sale of Interest of Co-Owner in Property of the Estate [11 U.S.C. §§ 363 and 542] - Nature of Suit: 91 - Declaratory judgment, 11 Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property, 31 - Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h)

From: 4/25/18, 6/27/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

The Status Conference is CONTINUED to October 17, 2018, 2:00 p.m. per the Plaintiff's request for time to finalize a settlement.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford

Defendant(s):

Joseph Harter Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sandra Lou Harter

Todd L Turoci

Chapter 7

John Rose Represented By

Dina Farhat

Tammy Rose Represented By

Dina Farhat

Brennan Rose Represented By Dina Farhat

KayLynne Rose Represented By Dina Farhat

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy

Anthony A Friedman

2:00 PM

6:17-19010

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01020 SCE Federal Credit Union v. Durham

#39.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by SCE Federal Credit Union against Sara Durham. (14 ),(14A) priority tax claims)), 62 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud

From: 3/21/18, 6/27/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sara Durham Represented By

Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Sara Durham Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By

Bruce P. Needleman

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-19042

Trending Up

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01078 Simons (TR) v. Parks et al

#40.00 Motion for Default Judgment against Robert and Barbara Parks Also #41

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND

On October 30, 2017, Trending Up ("Debtor") filed for chapter 7 relief. Larry Simons is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The Debtor’s Statement of Financial Affairs indicates that tranfers totaling $36,000 were made to Mr. and Mrs. Parks (collectively, the "Parks" or "Defendants") of 975 Kostka Lane in Florissant, MO 63031 (the "Kostka Address").

On April 3, 2018, the Trustee filed suit against the Parks seeking avoidance and recovery of preferential transfers, preservation of the same, and disallowance of claims (the "Complaint"). On April 4, 2018, the Trustee filed his executed summons indicating service on the Parks at the Kostka Address. On May 17, 2018, the Trustee requested entry of default as against the Parks. The Clerk entered default on the same date. On July 30, 2018, the Trustee filed his Motion for Default Judgment (the "Motion").

On August 9, 2018, the Parks filed Opposition to the Motion ("Opposition").

On August 15, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply ("Reply").

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trending Up

Chapter 7

DISCUSSION

The Opposition asserts that the Trustee failed to obtain personal jurisdiction because he did not validly serve the Parks at their correct address. The Opposition underscores that Trustee realized he did not have their correct address because he later apparently served the Parks at their residence in early August.

FRBP 7004(b)(1) requires service of a summons and complaint by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual's dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7004. In their declaration, the Parks assert that they have never used the Kostka Address and that it has never been their work or home address. (Parks Decl.s).

In his Reply, the Trustee asserts that the address was served on the Parks based on the following facts: (1) the Debtor listed the Kostka Address on the SOFA; (2) Debtor’s CEO, the daughter of the Defendants, confirmed that the address in the SOFA was accurate when she was questioned at the meeting of creditors; and (3) prior correspondence to the Kostka Address addressed to the Defendants was not returned, thus Trustee had reason to believe the address was accurate.

Here, the Trustee does not dispute that the Kostka Address is neither the Parks’ residence nor that they are not employees or officers of the Debtor such that service on them at the Kostka Address could be proper under Rule 7004. Thus, based on the evidence presented by the Defendants, the Court finds that service of the summons and Complaint was improper. The Motion must be denied on that basis.

However, as to dismissal of the case, the Trustee is correct that improper service does not require the court to dismiss an action where service may still be obtained given that the Trustee asserts the time limit for filing the action has not expired. Grammenos

Lemos, 457 F.2d 1067, 1070 (2d Cir. 1972) (internal citations omitted).

Finally, the Opposition asserts that the Trustee’s refusal to withdraw the Motion after being notified that he had improperly served the Parks, constitutes an
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trending Up

Chapter 7
abuse of process. On these grounds, the Opposition seeks an award of fees and costs in an amount of $1,200 for having had to file opposition to the Motion. However, pursuant to §105(a), the Court’s inherent power to award sanctions requires that the litigant must have "engaged in bad faith or willful disobedience of a court's order." Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 45-47 (1991). In Chambers, the Court left no question that a court may levy fee-based sanctions when a party has acted in bad faith, vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons, delaying or disrupting litigation, or has taken actions in the litigation for an improper purpose. Here, the record does not support a finding that the Trustee had the requisite bad faith. Instead, the Trustee relied upon the statements of the Parks’ own daughter and on the bankruptcy petition in determining to serve the Defendants at the Kostka address. Moreover, the Court is not inclined to award fees on a request in an opposition to a motion. The Defendants are free to seek sanctions via request for an order to show cause pursuant to LBR 9020.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is denied without prejudice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Trending Up Represented By
Daniel King
Defendant(s):
Robert Parks Represented By
Kathleen P March
Barbara Parks Represented By Kathleen P March
Movant(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trending Up

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-19042

Trending Up

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01078 Simons (TR) v. Parks et al

#41.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Larry D Simons (TR) against Robert Parks, Barbara Parks. (Charge To Estate) Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference

From: 6/5/18 Also #40
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Trending Up Represented By
Daniel King
Defendant(s):
Robert Parks Represented By
Kathleen P March
Barbara Parks Represented By Kathleen P March
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-11717

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01132 Marquez v. Amini

#42.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01132. Complaint by Gustavo Marquez against Jordan Halston Amini . false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) ,(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Gustavo Marquez Represented By Curtis M King
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#43.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding From: 7/11/18
Also #44 EH
Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Mina Farah Represented By
Wayne W Suojanen
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#44.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)
1. by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Mina Farah against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18 Also #43

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Wayne W Suojanen

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#45.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding From: 7/11/18

Also #46 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#46.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)

(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18 Also #45

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Wayne W Suojanen

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al

#47.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State A Claim Also #48 & #49

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 8, 2017, Mark Bastorous and Bernadette Shenouda (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief. Subsequent to the filing, five adversary suits were filed by various plaintiffs alleging that the Debtors engaged in fraudulent business transactions in connection with their real estate business activities.

On March 12, 2018, the instant adversary proceeding ("Complaint") was filed by Chienan Chen and Chun-Wu Li ("Plaintiffs") against the Debtors and 3 Columnar Ladera LLC, Mike Bareh, and MB Capital Group LLC (collectively, "Defendants"). An amended complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs on April 8, 2018 (the "FAC"). On May 25, 2018, the after Defendants filed their first motions to dismiss, the parties stipulated to permit the filing of a Second Amended Complaint the ("SAC") and the motions to dismiss were taken off calendar. The SAC was filed on June 15, 2018.

On June 29, 2018, the Debtors filed a motion to dismiss the SAC ("Motion").

Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to the Motion on August 8, 2018 ("Opposition"). Debtors filed their reply on August 15, 2018 ("Reply"). The SAC seeks a determination of nondischargeability under §§ 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(6).

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

LEGAL STANDARD

In reviewing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a court may only consider the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, and matters of judicial notice. United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2003). A court accepts the plaintiff's factual allegations in the complaint as true and construes them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000). "Dismissal can be based on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory." Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988).

Rule 12(b)(6) must be read in conjunction with Rule 8(a), which requires "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); see Ileto v. Glock, 349 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2003). "While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). To plead sufficiently, a plaintiff must proffer "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. Accordingly, "where the claim is plausible—meaning something more than a sheer possibility, but less than a probability—the plaintiff's failure to prove the case on the pleadings does not warrant dismissal." OSU Student All. v. Ray, 699 F.3d 1053, 1078 (9th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule 9(b)") provides that "[i]n alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake." Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). This is because allegations of fraud "must be specific enough to give a defendant notice" of its allegedly fraudulent conduct so that the defendant "may defend against the charge." MacDonald v. Ford Motor Co., 37 F. Supp. 3d 1087, 1092 (N.D. Cal. 2014) (citing Semegen v. Weidner, 780 F.2d 727, 731 (9th Cir. 1985)). As a general matter, allegations sounding in fraud "must satisfy the particularity requirement of Rule 9(b)." Kearns v. Ford Motor Co., 567 F.3d 1120, 1125 (9th Cir. 2009) (citing Vess v. Ciba–Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d

1097, 1103–04 (9th Cir. 2003).)

While Rule 9(b) requires that Plaintiffs allege fraud with particularity, "knowledge[ ] and other conditions of a person's mind may be alleged generally." Fed.

R. Civ. P. 9(b). In other words, "[t]he requirements of Rule 9(b) may be 'relaxed as to

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

matters peculiarly within the opposing party's knowledge,' if the plaintiffs cannot be expected to have personal knowledge of the facts prior to discovery." In re Gupta Corp. Sec. Litig., 900 F. Supp. 1217, 1228 (N.D. Cal. 1994) (citing Wool v. Tandem Computers, Inc., 818 F.2d 1433, 1439 (9th Cir. 1987).) Similarly, for allegations based upon "information and belief" to be facially plausible, either the facts on which the allegations are based must be "peculiarly within the possession and control of the defendant," or the belief must be "based on factual information that makes the inference of culpability plausible." Vavak v. Abbott Labs., Inc., 2011 WL 10550065, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 17, 2011) (quoting Arista Records, LLC v. Doe 3, 604 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2010).) "To satisfy Rule 9(b), a pleading must identify the who, what, when, where, and how of the misconduct charged, as well as what is false or misleading about [the purportedly fraudulent] statement, and why it is false." Mui Ho

v. Toyota Motor Corp., 931 F. Supp. 2d 987, 992 (N.D. Cal. 2013) (quoting Cafasso, United States ex rel v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1055 (9th Cir. 2011)) (internal quotation marks omitted) (formatting in original).

DISCUSSION

As a threshold matter, the Debtors assert that the SAC is insufficient because the Plaintiffs have not "made a connection to the underlying non-bankruptcy law cause of action supporting the request for money judgment". (Mot. at p. 5). The prayer for relief, however, belies Debtors’ contention in that the Plaintiffs plainly seek a nondischargeability determination as to the debts represented by the $150,000 and

$100,000 loans allegedly made by Chen and Li, respectively. Moreover, Counts 1 and 2 of the SAC explicitly make reference only to nondischargeability claims. However, the Debtors are correct that to the extent that the SAC seeks compensatory damages, the Court’s eventual judgment will not award such fees absent a request for and determination regarding a money judgment. Absent such a request, the Court’s final ruling shall be limited to the entry of a judgment as to the nondischargeability claims.

The remainder of the Motion asserts in generalized fashion that the SAC fails to plead sufficient factual content to support the claims under §§ 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)

(6) arguing in essence that the SAC’s failure to specifically enumerate how each allegation ties to the elements of the nondischargeability claims should be fatal. Here, the SAC plainly satisfies the Rule 8(a) and Rule 9 standards and sets forth a plain statement indicating how the Defendant Bastorous and his "alter ego" companies engaged in a scheme to induce investors into lending funds for real estate projects while omitting and/or misrepresenting the true uses of the funds loaned. The

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

allegations in the SAC plausibly assert that Bastorous and Bareh obtained the loans from Plaintiffs by misrepresentations, fraud and/or that they caused willful and malicious injury to the Plaintiffs.

Finally, the Court finds that the SAC only in conclusory fashion makes reference to Bernadett Shenouda. As such, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to Shenouda without prejudice. Additionally, although the SAC makes reference to § 523(a)(4) in ¶ 24, this claim is not otherwise referenced in the complaint and as such, the Court infers that the Plaintiffs opted not to pursue a claim for nondischargeability on this basis.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion in its entirety as to Defendant Bastorous but to GRANT the Motion in its entirety as to Defendant Shenouda.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se

Mike Bareh Represented By

Mirco J Haag Jason E Goldstein

MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Thomas F Nowland

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey

Chun-Wu Li Represented By

Douglas L Mahaffey

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al

#48.00 Motion to Dismiss Count Three of the Second Amended Complaint - the Sole Claim for Relief Alleged Against Mr. Bareh, or in the Alternative, Dismiss or Strike the Claim for Punitive Damages

Also #47 & #49 EH

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND

On June 29, 2018, the Defendant Mike Bareh filed a motion to dismiss Count Three of the SAC ("Motion"). Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to the Motion on August 9, 2018 ("Opposition"). Defendant filed his reply on August 15, 2018

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

("Reply"). Count Three of the SAC seeks a judgment against Defendant and nondebtor Bareh finding fraud was committed against Plaintiffs and a money judgment in the amount of the total investment made by Plaintiffs plus interest and liability for violations of various Securities laws.

DISCUSSION

The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction rests on the party asserting that the court has jurisdiction. McNutt v. GM Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 182–83 (1936). Bankruptcy courts have subject matter jurisdiction over proceedings "arising under title 11, or arising in or related to cases under title 11." 28

U.S.C. § 1334(b); see also id. 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(1). The Court has neither "arising under" nor "arising in" jurisdiction over Defendant Bareh because the claims asserted against him do not arise under title 11, nor are they created or determined by the bankruptcy code. Thus, the only possible basis for this Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant Bareh is "related to" jurisdiction.

"A bankruptcy court's ‘related to’ jurisdiction is very broad, including nearly every matter directly or indirectly related to the bankruptcy." Sasson v. Sokoloff (In re Sasson), 424 F.3d 864, 868 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The Ninth Circuit has adopted the definition of "related to" jurisdiction expressed by the Third Circuit in Pacor, Inc. v. Higgins, 743 F.2d 984, 994 (3rd Cir.1984). See In re Fietz, 852 F.2d 455, 457 (9th Cir.1988). Under that formulation, a civil proceeding is "related to" the bankruptcy if its outcome could conceivably have any effect on the bankruptcy estate. The proceeding need not be against the debtor or the debtor's property. It is sufficient if the "outcome could alter the debtor's rights, liabilities, options, or freedom of action (either positively or negatively) and which in any way impacts upon the handling and administration of the bankruptcy estate." Fietz, 852 F.2d at 457 (9th Cir.1988) (quoting Pacor, 743 F.2d at 994).

The United States Supreme Court has also recognized the definition of "related to" jurisdiction formulated in Pacor. The Court noted that although Congress intended the "related to" language to evidence a jurisdictional "grant of some breadth," it was not intended to be "limitless." Celotex Corporation v. Edwards, 514 U.S. 300, ––––,

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

115 S.Ct. 1493, 1499, 131 L.Ed.2d 403 (1995).

Here, there is no evidentiary record to indicate what effect a ruling on the securities fraud claims might have on the Debtors’ bankruptcy estate. The Debtors are named as defendants in the SAC but only as to the Plaintiffs’ nondischargeability claims. There is no analysis of how judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs as against Bareh would have any impact on the substantive rights of the Debtors or the estate. In re ACI-HDT Supply Co., 205 B.R. 231, 237 (9th Cir. BAP 1997). Plaintiffs have not demonstrated, for example, that Debtors could be bound by res judicata or collateral estoppel based on entry of judgment against Bareh on the claims asserted. Absent such analysis and evidence, the Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to establish this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction over Bareh.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to Bareh and DISMISS Count 3. Dismissal is without prejudice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se

Mike Bareh Represented By

Mirco J Haag Jason E Goldstein

MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mike Bareh Represented By

Mirco J Haag Jason E Goldstein

Plaintiff(s):

Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey

Chun-Wu Li Represented By

Douglas L Mahaffey

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al

#49.00 CONT Status Conference re Amended Complaint by Douglas L Mahaffey on behalf of Chienan Chen, Chun-Wu Li against Bernadette Shenouda, 3 Columnar Ladera LLC, Mike Bareh, Mark Bastorous, MB Capital Group LLC.

From: 5/9/18, 6/6/18 Also #47 & #48

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se

Mike Bareh Represented By

Mirco J Haag Jason E Goldstein

MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey

Chun-Wu Li Represented By

Douglas L Mahaffey

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#50.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State A Claim Also #51

Docket 17

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 8, 2017, Mark Bastourous and Bernadette Shenouda (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief.

On March 12, 2018, Mona and Rafet Gerges and St. Mary Properties, LLC (collectively, Plaintiffs") filed their complaint for dischargeability determination under

§§ 523(a)(2), (a)(4), and (a)(6) and for a finding of Alter Ego liability and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs (the "Complaint"). The Complaint alleges generally that the Plaintiffs made loans in the original amount of $540,000 plus interest at 1.66% every six months (the "Advances") to Defendants’ wholly owned entity, MRM Investment Group Inc. ("MRM") and by deposits with Defendants’ wholly owned corporate entity Professional Investment Group, LLC ("PIG"), secured by real property located at 2311

S. 6th Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006 (the "Arcadia Property").

The Court dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend on May 16, 2018. The First Amended Complaint was filed on June 15, 2018 (the "FAC"). On June 29, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion to Dismiss the FAC ("Motion"). The Plaintiffs filed their Opposition on August 7, 2018 ("Opposition"). A reply by the Debtors was filed on August 15, 2018 ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

Civil Rule 12(b)(6) standards

Under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), made applicable in adversary proceedings through

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Rule 7012, a bankruptcy court may dismiss a complaint if it fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." In reviewing a Civil Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the trial court must accept as true all facts alleged in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir.

2001). However, the trial court need not accept as true conclusory allegations in a complaint or legal characterizations cast in the form of factual allegations. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555–56, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007);

Hartman v. Gilead Scis., Inc. (In re Gilead Scis. Sec. Litig.), 536 F.3d 1049, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).

To avoid dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must aver in the complaint "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173

L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). It is axiomatic that a claim cannot be plausible when it has no legal basis. A dismissal under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) may be based either on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or on the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory. Johnson

v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008).

Rule 9(b)

Allegations regarding fraud are subject to a heightened pleading standard.

Civil Rule 9(b), made applicable to adversary proceedings by Rule 7009, requires that a plaintiff must state "with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. " The

Ninth Circuit has provided guidance for the "with particularity" requirement by stating that to comport with Civil Rule 9(b) the complaint must (1) specify the averred fraudulent representations; (2) aver the representations were false when made; (3) identify the speaker; (4) state when and where the statements were made; and (5) state the manner in which the representations were false and misleading. Lancaster Cmty.

Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d 397, 405 (9th Cir.1991).

Because fraud encompasses a wide variety of circumstances, the requirements of Civil Rule 9(b)—like Civil Rule 8(a)(2)—should provide all defendants with sufficient information to formulate a response. Therefore, the complaint cannot lump multiple defendants together but must "inform each defendant separately of the allegations surrounding [its] alleged participation in the fraud." Swartz v. KPMB LLP, 476 F.3d 756, 764–65 (9th Cir. 2007).

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

However, in Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d 616, 627 (9th Cir.1997), the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that "[e]very transaction alleged to be fraudulent does not have to be detailed in the complaint." Instead, the Rule 9(b) requirement is satisfied where the Complaint sets forth an explanation as to why the transactions were false or misleading. See Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d at 625; see also In re Dreier LLP, 453

B.R. 499, 508-09 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011) ("Under appropriate circumstances, multiple transactions will be collapsed and treated as steps in a single transaction for analysis under the fraudulent conveyance laws.").

FRAUD AND WILLFUL AND MALICIOUS INJURY

Allegations regarding fraud or misrepresentation are subject to a heightened pleading standard. Civil Rule 9(b), made applicable to adversary proceedings by Rule 7009, requires that a plaintiff must state "with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. " The Ninth Circuit has provided guidance for the "with

particularity" requirement by stating that to comport with Civil Rule 9(b) the complaint must (1) specify the averred fraudulent representations; (2) aver the representations were false when made; (3) identify the speaker; (4) state when and where the statements were made; and (5) state the manner in which the representations were false and misleading. Lancaster Cmty. Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d 397, 405 (9th Cir.1991).

In the FAC, Plaintiffs more clearly set forth that they were induced to invest in the Defendants’ real estate enterprises based both on affirmative misrepresentations regarding the uses for which the Plaintiffs’ investments would be employed by the Defendants. (FAC at ¶19) and based on omissions regarding material facts relevant to the transactions (FAC at ¶14) such as the failure to disclose that a Deed of Trust in favor of the Plaintiffs would be junior to another Deed of Trust (a fact which ultimately resulted in elimination of the Plaintiff’s Deed of Trust via foreclosure. The

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

FAC also clarifies that with respect to the Office Property, that the Defendants allegedly knew but failed to disclose that there was a delinquency owed to Wells Fargo Bank, whose lien was senior in priority to the lien granted to the Plaintiffs. (FAC at ¶¶32-33). The FAC then goes on to detail at least three other instances in which Defendants failed to disclose material facts regarding other encumbrances on properties that were senior to the interests conveyed to Plaintiffs by the Defendants to secure loans from them.

In sum, the Court finds that the FAC sufficiently details facts which plausibly set forth claims for actual fraud/misrepresentation and willful and malicious injury under §§ 523(a)(2) and (a)(6).

DECLARATORY RELIEF and ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS

The sole grounds advanced for dismissal of the Third and Fourth Claims is that assuming the Court dismisses the First and Second Claims, these claims cannot stand alone. Given that the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion as to the First and Second Claims, the Court also is inclined to DENY the Motion as to the Third and Fourth Claims for lack of cause shown.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Movant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mona Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

Rafet Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#51.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury

From: 5/9/18, 5/16/18, 7/11/18 Also #50

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Mona Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

Rafet Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01057 Whitson et al v. Bastorous

#52.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01057. Complaint by Blaine Whitson, Susan Whitson, Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Plan, Gurpaljit Deoll, Benny Winefeld, RM Holdings, LLC against Mark Bastorous. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))

From: 5/9/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Blaine Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Susan Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Represented By

Benjamin Taylor

Gurpaljit Deoll Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Benny Winefeld Represented By Benjamin Taylor

RM Holdings, LLC Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01127 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC et al

#1.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding filed by Defendants Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP; Les Zieve; John Steele; and Janaya Carter

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

FNF Servicing Inc Pro Se

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs

LoanCare, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By Jennifer Needs

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs Jennifer Needs

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By Jennifer Needs

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01129 Tarhuni v. Home Loan Investment Bank FSB et al

#2.00 Status Conference Re: Complaint (Fee Not Required) by Melanie Tarhuni against Home Loan Investment Bank FSB , US Department of Hud , Everett A Barton Jr. Nature of Suit: 21 - Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property, 71 - Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay, 91 - Declaratory judgment

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Home Loan Investment Bank FSB Represented By

Angie M Marth

US Department of Hud Pro Se

Everett A Barton Jr Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-25050

Gilbert Joe Holguin and Mary Cruz Holguin

Chapter 13 #3.00 Motion To Waive Requirement of Application for Discharge for Debtor 1; Declaration of Debtor 2 in Support

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:

8/23/18

BACKGROUND

On December 17, 2014, Gilbert & Mary Holguin ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On January 28, 2015, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On August 2, 2018, Debtors filed a motion to waive requirement of application for discharge for Gilbert Holguin ("Gilbert"). The motion indicates that Gilbert passed away in September 2016. On August 6, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating approval on the condition that a death certificate be provided.

DISCUSSION

The material relief requested in the motion at issue is a request for certain discharge requirements, outlined in 11 U.S.C. § 1328, to be waived for Gilbert. One court, in considering the applicability of the § 1328 certification requirements to a deceased debtor, stated the following: "The fact that a debtor has died does not necessarily preclude entry of a discharge. However, for a discharge to be granted, a debtor must

11:00 AM

CONT...

Gilbert Joe Holguin and Mary Cruz Holguin

Chapter 13

still meet the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 1328." In re Bouton, 2013 WL 5536212 at

*1 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2013). The Court in Bouton avoided the requirements by noting that the instructional course requirement is waived for deceased debtors pursuant to § 109(h)(4).

11 U.S.C. § 1328(a) and (h) outline certain requirements which must be satisfied in order for a Chapter 13 debtor to obtain a discharge. 11 U.S.C. § 1328(a) states, in pertinent part:

Subject to subsection (d), as soon as practicable after completion by the debtor of all payments under the plan, and in the case of a debtor who is required by a judicial or administrative order, or by statute, to pay a domestic support obligation, after such debtor certifies that all amounts payable, after such debtor certifies that all amounts payable under such order or such statute that are due on or before the date of the certification (including amounts due before the petition was filed, but only to the extent provided for by the plan) have been paid . . .

There does appear to be at least one bankruptcy court that specifically addressed the applicability of the § 1328(a) and (h) requirements to a deceased debtor in a jointly filed Chapter 13 case, In re Levy, 2014 WL 1323165 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2014).
Notably, the Court stated the following:

Only two documents now stand between the deceased debtor and a discharge: the certifications regarding DSO obligations and § 1328(h). Since further administration was possible, the question becomes whether there is anything either so personal or unique about the end-of-case requirements to prevent either waiver or satisfaction of the requirements by another on behalf [of] a deceased debtor.

Id. at *2. Summarily, the court in Levy reached the following conclusion:
11:00 AM
CONT...

Gilbert Joe Holguin and Mary Cruz Holguin

Chapter 13

Since the § 1328(a) certification appears to fall under the latter category [not altering liability on a debt], the court finds no reason that the DSO certification requirement cannot be undertaken by another in appropriate circumstances.
The requirement therefore does not impede "further administration" contemplated under Rule 1016.

Similarly, the court reaches the same conclusion about § 1328(h), albeit along slightly divergent reasoning.

Id. at *3. The Court agrees with the result reached in Levy. If the certification requirements imposed by § 1328 (a) & (h) invariably required an action to be taken by the debtor personally, the purpose of FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1016, which permits the continued administration of a Chapter 13 case when appropriate, would be frustrated.

Finally, the Levy stated the following:

For the purposes of filing end of the case documents, the court finds that a person with specific knowledge of the deceased debtor’s finances may act on behalf of the debtor in completing the § 1328(a) and (h) certifications. To establish knowledge, the person must file an affidavit outlining a sufficient factual foundation in order to establish a fitting record.

Id. at *4. In accordance with Levy, the Court will not outright waive a requirement imposed by the Bankruptcy Code, but will allow the requirement to be satisfied by an individual with "specific knowledge of the deceased debtor’s finances."

TENTATIVE RULING
11:00 AM
CONT...

Gilbert Joe Holguin and Mary Cruz Holguin

Chapter 13

In accordance with the above, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion (assuming a death certificate is provided to the Chapter 13 Trustee) only to the extent of allowing a qualified individual to complete the § 1328 requirements on behalf of Debtor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gilbert Joe Holguin Represented By Sunita N Sood
Joint Debtor(s):
Mary Cruz Holguin Represented By Sunita N Sood
Movant(s):
Gilbert Joe Holguin Represented By Sunita N Sood
Mary Cruz Holguin Represented By Sunita N Sood
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:16-12349

Juventino Cabrera Ramos and Julie Ann Ramos

Chapter 13

#4.00 Debtor's Motion for Authority to Refinance Real Property LBR 3015-1(p) EH
Docket 47
Tentative Ruling:
8/23/18
BACKGROUND

On March 16, 2016, Juventino & Julie Ramos ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On June 14, 2016, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On July 6, 2018, Debtors filed a motion for authority to refinance real property. Pursuant to the refinancing, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), the current holder of the first trust deed, will be paid in full, and American Pacific Mortgage will be granted a first trust deed securing a claim of $364,672. On July 10, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating approving. On July 19, 2018, Wells Fargo filed a conditional non-opposition. On August 2, 2018, Debtors set the matter for hearing.

DISCUSSION

Wells Fargo’s conditional non-opposition contains the following conditions:
11:00 AM
CONT...

Juventino Cabrera Ramos and Julie Ann Ramos

Chapter 13
1. Creditor’s Claim shall be paid off in full before satisfying any other lien on the Property;
2. Creditor shall be permitted to submit an updated payoff demand to the applicable escrow or title company facilitating the refinance so that Creditor’s Claim is paid in full at the time the refinance of the Property is finalized.
3. In the event that the refinance of the Property does not take place, Creditor shall retain its Lien for the full amount due under the Subject Loan; and
4. To the extent that the Debtors dispute any amounts which Creditor claims are owed on the Subject Loan, that the undisputed amount of Creditor’s Claim be paid at the close of the refinance and for the disputed amount of Creditor’s claim to be segregated in an interest bearing account with an additional
  $10,000 in proceeds pending further Order of the bankruptcy court to allow for Creditor’s potential recovery of any of its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred to the extent that Creditor successfully establishes its right to the disputed amount due on its Claim.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Juventino Cabrera Ramos Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Julie Ann Ramos Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Juventino Cabrera Ramos and Julie Ann Ramos
  
  Chapter 13
  Juventino Cabrera Ramos Pro Se
  Julie Ann Ramos Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:16-14476
  
  Juan Rene Fullen, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #5.00 CONT Motion to Authorize Loan Modification (LMM) Agreement and Modify Loan on Real Property (LBR 9013-1 (o) )
  
  From: 7/19/18 EH
  Docket 45
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juan Rene Fullen Jr. Represented By Luis G Torres
  Movant(s):
  Nationstar Mortgage LLC Represented By Brandye N Foreman Darlene C Vigil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-11261
  
  Ernie Macias
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 CONT Order to show cause why Alon Darvish should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 105 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020
  
  CASE DISMISSED 3/13/17
  
  From: 11/30/17, 1/25/18, 4/12/18, 6/14/18
  
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/30/17
  BACKGROUND
  On February 21, 2017, Ernie Macias ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtor’s case was filed by Alon Darvish ("Darvish"). On March 13, 2017, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file information.
  
  On March 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Disgorge Attorney’s Fees ("Disgorgement Motion"). On June 13, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the UST’s Disgorgement Motion (the "Disgorgement Order"). The Disgorgement Order required Darvish to file his disclosure of compensation, and to disgorge fees received from the Debtor back to him.
  
  On September 20, 2017, the UST filed its Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why Alon Darvish Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11
  U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020 (the "Motion for OSC"). The Motion for OSC specifically asserted that Darvish had failed to comply with any part of the Disgorgement Order. The UST’s Motion for OSC further asserted that Darvish had repeatedly failed to disclose compensation and had been sanctioned for such conduct under similar circumstances in at least 6 other cases. (Motion for OSC at 9).
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ernie Macias
  
  Chapter 13
  
  On October 20, 2017, the Court granted the Motion for OSC and ordered Darvish to show cause why he should not be held in contempt (the "OSC"). Darvish filed his response to the OSC on November 16, 2017 ("Response"). On November 21, 2017, the UST replied to the Response.
  
  DISCUSSION
  In his Response, Darvish indicated that his practice includes the filing of skeletal petitions for chapter 13 debtors for the purpose of stopping foreclosures. He indicated that when such skeletal petitions are filed, his software does not file the Disclosure of Compensation. Darvish asserts that he is a solo practitioner who is overwhelmed and understaffed and who is trying to rectify the issues in his practice. In Reply, the UST objects particularly to Darvish’s failure to outline specific steps he intends to take to remedy the issues at his firm. The UST is also concerned that Darvish has essentially admitted that his practice includes the filing of abusive petitions intended solely to avoid foreclosures. The UST requests that the Court continue the matter for Darvish to set forth specific remedial actions as ordered. The UST also requests that the Court separately consider whether a separate order to show cause is justified based on Darvish’s inherently abusive prevention practice.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court agrees with the UST that Darvish’s explanation is insufficient. Darvish’s Response indicates clearly the reason for the failure to file disclosure of compensation forms. Despite this fact, he does not explain the ongoing failure to file these forms, particularly where he has previously been sanctioned for failing to disclose his compensation. The ongoing failure to file required documents, despite having already been sanctioned, supports the UST’s request for a specific plan of remediation. Absent such plan, Darvish may simply continue to rely on his thus far unreliable bankruptcy filing software.
  
  Separately, the UST’s concern regarding Darvish’s practice of filing skeletal petitions is well-taken. In particular, if Darvish is advising his clients to file abusive petitions to
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ernie Macias
  
  Chapter 13
  delay foreclosure, such conduct may warrant further sanctions/discipline.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ernie Macias Represented By
  Alon Darvish
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-12149
  
  Irma Dalia Cantu
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #7.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
  Docket 63
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On March 18, 2017, Irma Cantu ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On June 15, 2018, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  Three days later, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for failure to submit tax returns or refunds. Debtor did not file an opposition to the motion. After no appearance was made on behalf of Debtor at the motion to dismiss, the case was dismissed on July 25, 2018.
  
  The day before the case was formally dismissed, Debtor filed a motion to vacate a dismissal order which did not yet exist. On July 25, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating conditional approval of the motion.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  Debtor relies on FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1), incorporated into bankruptcy
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Irma Dalia Cantu
  
  Chapter 13
  proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, which allows for relief from an order based on "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect."
  
  The legal basis for Debtor’s assertion that the dismissal order should be vacated is that Debtor’s counsel inadvertently did not appear at the hearing due to an office error. It is well established, however, that "an attorney’s ignorance and carelessness does not provide grounds for Rule 60(b) relief." In re Mercado, 144 B.R. 879, 886 (Bankr.
  C.D. Cal. 1992) (citing Bershad v. McDonough, 469 F.2d 1333, 1337 (7th Cir. 1972). And the mere assertion that counsel did not fulfill its duties, but that such carelessness was inadvertent, is clearly inadequate to support Rule 60(b) relief. See, e.g., In re ACME Motors, Inc., 125 B.R. 702, 703 (Bankr. D.R.I. 1991).
  
  "Rule 60(b) relief is extraordinary." Id. Yet, in this court, a request for relief from a Chapter 13 dismissal order has become ordinary. On occasion, the requests are legally sound. Here, however, the evidence provided simply indicates that Debtor’s counsel did not attend the hearing for reasons that are unclear or unstated.
  
  The Seventh Circuit has stated that:
  1. he clients are principals, the attorney is an agent, and under the law of agency the principal is bound by his chosen agent’s deeds. The rule is that all of the attorney’s misconduct (except in the cases where the act is outside the scope of employment or in cases of excusable neglect) becomes the problem of the client. A lawyer who inexcusably neglects his client’s obligations does not present exceptional circumstances.
  Bakery Mach. & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc., 570 F.3d 845, 848 (7th Cir. 2009). "Although attorney carelessness can [in certain circumstances] constitute ‘excusable neglect’ under Rule 60(b)(1), attorney inattentiveness to litigation is not excusable, no matter what the resulting consequences the attorney’s somnolent
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Irma Dalia Cantu
  
  Chapter 13
  behavior may have on a litigant." Easley v. Kirmsee, 382 F.3d 693, 698 (7th Cir. 2004) (collecting cases).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion conditioned on compliance with the Trustee’s conditions.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens
  Movant(s):
  Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens Leonard J Cravens
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-17934
  
  Ignacio Figueroa and Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #8.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 5 by Claimant Alderson Law Firm EH
  Docket 41
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/18
  BACKGROUND:
  
  On September 21, 2017, Ignacio Figueroa ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On November 13, 2017, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.
  
  The claims bar date was January 24, 2018. On June 11, 2018, Alederson Law Firm ("Creditor") filed an unsecured claim in the amount of $240,402.04 ("Claim 5"). On June 29, 2018, Debtor filed an objection to Claim as untimely.
  
  APPLICABLE LAW:
  
  Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ignacio Figueroa and Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa
  
  Chapter 13
  upon a motion for relief. Id.
  
  When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." In re Medina, 205 B.R. 216, 222 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.
  
  ANALYSIS:
  
  11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9) provides that failure to timely file a claim is grounds for disallowance of the claim. Creditor cites § 726(a)(3) as a basis for allowance of a tardily filed claim, but that section is only applicable to Chapter 7 cases. Creditor’s legal analysis refers to state law and state cases, which have no bearing on bankruptcy law and bankruptcy cases.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ignacio Figueroa and Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa
  
  Chapter 13
  The Court will SUSTAIN the objection and DISALLOW Claim 5 in its entirety.
  
  APPERANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ignacio Figueroa Represented By
  Ghada Helena Philips
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa Represented By
  Ghada Helena Philips
  Movant(s):
  Ignacio Figueroa Represented By
  Ghada Helena Philips
  Nadia Elizabeth Figueroa Represented By
  Ghada Helena Philips Ghada Helena Philips
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Application for Compensation/Amended Application (related document(s): 138 Application for Compensation for additional legal fees incurred and Notice of Motion for Caroline S Kim, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/12/2017 to 6/29/2018, Fee: $12,986.00, Expenses: $. filed by Debtor Sean Phillip Coy) and Notice of Amended Application for Attorney Fees
  
  CASE DISMISSED 7/11/18
  
  Also #10 & #11 EH
  Docket 144
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/18
  
  On December 13, 2017, Sean Coy ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Ultimately, on July 11, 2018, the case was dismissed. Subsequent to dismissal, Debtor’s counsel, Kim Law Group, P.C. ("Counsel") filed three separate fee applications relating to three different legal matters. On July 24, 2018, Trustee filed comments requesting a hearing on all three applications, although Trustee did not indicate its position on the requested fees.
  1. Fee Application #1 (Dkt. No. 138, amended by Dkt No. 142, then withdrawn by Dkt. No. 143, then amended against by Dkt. No. 144):
    
    It appears that this application requests fees relating to two categories: (1) basic services; and (2) non-basic services. Counsel states that Debtor agreed to pay $6,000 pursuant to the RARA but has, to date, only paid $1,036, leaving
    $4,964 unpaid. Counsel also requests an additional $3,745 for non-basic services, billed at a rate of $350/hour. The Court notes that, pursuant to the RARA filed in this case [Dkt. No. 32], Debtor agreed to pay $6,000 for basic services, and the guidelines permit a maximum fee of $6,000 for basic
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Sean Phillip Coy
    services. In the absence of any opposition to this request, given that the amount requested falls within the range permitted by this district, and given
    
    Chapter 13
    the billing records submitted as Attachment A to the application, the Court is inclined to approve the $4,964 fees requested for basic services.
    
    The second categories of fees requested, fees for non-basic services, relate to fees related to work on a pending adversary proceeding. The Court notes that Debtor was not a party in the adversary proceeding; instead, both parties in the adversary proceeding were lienholders, although Debtor was directly involved in the discovery conducted. Nevertheless, Counsel billed $1,575 for review of pleadings filed in the case. Given that Debtor was not a party in the adversary proceeding, the Court finds these "review" entries to be unreasonable. The Court is inclined to approve the remaining $2,170 in fees which were related to discovery in the proceeding.
  2. Fee Application #2 (Dkt. No. 145)
    
    The second fee applications requests $1,250 for a motion to avoid lien (Dkt. No 46). The Court notes that the amount requested is the presumptively reasonable fee in the Court Manual. In the absence of any opposition to this request, the Court is inclined to approve the presumptively reasonable request of $1,250.
  3. Fee Application #3 (Dkt. No. 146)
  The third fee application requests $2,378.96 for an opposed motion to avoid lien (Dkt. No. 111). The Court has reviewed Counsel’s billing entries and, in the absence of any opposition to this request, the Court is inclined to approve this fees in their entirety.
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  The Court is inclined to approve the fees requested in docket number 144 in a reduced amount of $7,134, and approve the second and third fee applications in their entirety.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  Debtor(s):
  APPERANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Movant(s):
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 Application for Compensation for additional legal fees incurred and Notice of Motion for Caroline S Kim, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $1250.00
  
  CASE DISMISSED 7/11/18
  
  Also #9 & #11 EH
  Docket 145
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  See #9
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Movant(s):
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:17-20229
  
  Sean Phillip Coy
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Application for Compensation for additional Legal Fees and Notice of Motion for Caroline S Kim, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 6/1/2018 to 6/28/2018, Fee:
  $2,378.00
  
  CASE DISMISSED 7/11/18
  
  Also #9 & #10 EH
  Docket 146
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  See #9
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Movant(s):
  Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-10761
  
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18, 7/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ronald Wayne Cloyd Represented By Jonathan D Doan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-11640
  
  Zuleima Rosado
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Zuleima Rosado Represented By Edward T Weber
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:14-20002
  
  Steven W Moll
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #14.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments
  
  EH
  
  Docket 98
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Steven W Moll Represented By Gary J Holt
  Movant(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:14-22637
  
  Michelle Ann Maki
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #15.00 Motion for Hardship Discharge EH
  Docket 63
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/18
  BACKGROUND
  
  On February 2, 2012, Michelle Maki ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On February 9, 2015, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed. Subsequently, there were two orders to modify the plan.
  
  On May 21, 2018, Debtors filed a motion for hardship discharge. The basis for the hardship discharge is that Debtor’s cousin, who had been contribution $1,200 to Debtor as a joint-tenant at Debtor’s residence, passed away on October 12, 2017. On May 22, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to the motion. On July 23, 2018, Debtor filed a reply.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  11 U.S.C. § 1328(b) states:
Subject to subsection (d), at any time after the confirmation of the plan and
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michelle Ann Maki

Chapter 13
after notice and a hearing, the court may grant a discharge to a debtor that has not completed payments under the plan only if –
1. the debtor’s failure to complete such payments is due to circumstances for which the debtor should not justly be held accountable;
2. the value, as of the effective date of the plan, of property actually distributed under the plan on account of each allowed unsecured claim is not less than the amount that would have been paid on such claim if the estate of the debtor had been liquidated under chapter 7 of this title on such date; and
3. modification of the plan under section 1329 of this title is not practicable.
  
  The first and third standard are discretionary standards. The second standard is a mechanical standard referred to as the "best interests of creditors test". Debtors stated they have met the test because their Chapter 13 plan indicates that Chapter 7 liquidation would not result in any payment to unsecured creditors. Trustee disputes this assertion, arguing that Debtor’s second property, located in Arizona, was undervalued on the schedules, and, therefore, there is nonexempt equity available for distribution to unsecured creditors in a hypothetical Chapter 7 proceeding. While Debtor’s reply provides significant documentation, the material provided is less than clear and is not authenticated. Therefore, the Court would require clear evidence of the value of the property located at 2245 Del Rey Dr., Bullhead City, AZ 86442.
  
  Trustee argues that "Debtor has failed to demonstrate that the proposed failure to complete payments under the plan is due to circumstances for which the debtor should not be held accountable." The loss of income is, in this situation, clearly a factor beyond Debtor’s control. The evidence provided in the motion, however, fails to establish any steps taken by Debtor to remarket the property which was the basis for the rental income. Such evidence would be required to establish that the first prong has been satisfied.
  
  Trustee also argues that "Debtor has failed to demonstrate that modification of the
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Michelle Ann Maki
  
  Chapter 13
  plan under 11 U.S.C. 1329 is not practicable." The Court notes that the motion, as an attachment, contains amended Schedules I/J, however, those schedules were not filed separately on the docket. Furthermore, as noted by Trustee, the home costs outlined on Schedule J contradict the home costs identified in the motion’s declaration. For these reasons, the Court concludes that the third prong has not been satisfied at this time.
  
  Trustee also argues that Debtor has failed to provide copies of her 2017 tax returns. The Court notes that there is a pending motion to dismiss on that basis currently set for November 8, 2018. Compliance with this duty would be a prerequisite to any hardship discharge.
  
  Trustee argues that Debtor is asking in bad faith because she was previously permitted to retain tax refunds through a stipulation. The Court disagrees on this point. The order approving the stipulation essentially modified the terms of the plan.
  Functionally, this stipulation resulted in the equivalent of a suspension of plan payments, to be paid through the plan at a later date. There is no clear reason why such deferred payments would have to be reimbursed prior to a hardship discharge being granted. The failures regarding the reduced mortgage payment, however, do appear to suggest bad faith.
  
  Last, the Court does not accept that a failure of a third party to make "contributions" is a circumstance for which a debtor should not be held accountable for purposes of 11
  U.S.C. § 1328(b).
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion without prejudice.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Debtor(s):
  
  Michelle Ann Maki
  
  Chapter 13
  Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Joel M Feinstein
  Movant(s):
  Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Joel M Feinstein
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-13172
  
  Michelle Cadena Quinn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-13483
  
  JUANITA M ROMERO
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #17.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/28/18, 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  JUANITA M ROMERO Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14014
  
  Maggie Ruth Thomas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Maggie Ruth Thomas Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14015
  
  Clinton Jay Blankenship
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Clinton Jay Blankenship Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14020
  
  Patricia Ann Cook
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #20.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien with Adobe Springs Village HOA Also #21
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/2018
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion for failure to establish that the secured claim of Adobe Springs Village HOA is "a lien on an interest of the debtor in property." Specifically, the Court notes that the abstract of judgment attached to the motion indicates that the defendant is an individual named "Steven M. Caldwell"— who is not the Debtor in the instant case. Additionally, the Court notes that the exhibits to the motion are not authenticated.
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Patricia Ann Cook Represented By Brad Weil
  Movant(s):
  Patricia Ann Cook Represented By Brad Weil
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Patricia Ann Cook
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14020
  
  Patricia Ann Cook
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #21.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18, 7/19/18
  Also #20 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Patricia Ann Cook Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14053
  
  Wallace Stanton Miles
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #22.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Wallace Stanton Miles Represented By
  Stuart G Steingraber
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14135
  
  William Meineke and Kathie Meineke
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #23.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  William Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Kathie Meineke Represented By Todd B Becker
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14164
  
  Charles Williams, III
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Charles Williams, III Represented By Stephen L Burton
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14336
  
  Peter Najim
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Peter Najim Represented By
  Ivan Trahan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14337
  
  Jose Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #26.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Velasco Represented By
  Daniel King
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Daniel King
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14394
  
  Xavier Cristobal Luna
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #27.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18
  EH
  
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Xavier Cristobal Luna Represented By Roberto Gil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14603
  
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #28.00 CONT Motion for Setting Property Value re Creditor Bank of the West From: 8/2/18
  Also #29 EH
  Docket 15
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/02/18
  
  BACKGROUND
  
  On May 31, 2018, Gabriel and Jeneke Blanco (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2015 Heartland North Trail Caliber Series M-33BKSS (the "RV"). On June 15, 2018, the Debtors filed their Motion to Value the RV ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  One of the benefits of filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy is that under § 506(a) the debtor can bifurcate a secured, unavoidable debt, with one part representing the amount of the value of the collateral, and the deficiency being treated as an unsecured claim. See In re Penrod, 636 F.3d 1175, 1177 (9th Cir. 2011).
  
  The Debtors assert that the RV’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $24,575, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $5,047.70. In support the Debtor asserts that he consulted the NADA Guide. However, a copy of the NADA Guide report was not attached. Nor did the Debtors attach a Certificate of Title indicating the identity of the lienholder or a statement regarding the balance owed.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  As Claimant, Bank of the West, filed Proof of Claim No. 8-1, the Court can overcome the necessity of a Certificate of Title or statement regarding the balance owed. However, to meet their evidentiary burden, the Debtors must provide admissible evidence of the NADA guide report they consulted to determine the value of the RV.
  
  TENTATIVE RULING
  For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for Debtors to file and serve a supplemental Debtor declaration providing evidence of the NADA guide report consulted to establish fair market value.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Movant(s):
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14603
  
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #29.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 8/2/18
  Also #28 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14723
  
  Jose Luis Tijerina and Carmen Xochitl Tijerina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #30.00 Motion For Order Compelling Attorney to File Disclosure Of Compensation; Declaration of Abram Feuerstein
  
  CASE DISMISSED 7/9/18
  
  Also #31 EH
  
  Docket 16
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Luis Tijerina Represented By Roberto Gil
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carmen Xochitl Tijerina Represented By Roberto Gil
  Movant(s):
  United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
  Abram Feuerstein esq
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14723
  
  Jose Luis Tijerina and Carmen Xochitl Tijerina
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #30 EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Luis Tijerina Represented By Roberto Gil
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carmen Xochitl Tijerina Represented By Roberto Gil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14725
  
  Percylyn Agustin Basa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Percylyn Agustin Basa Represented By Benjamin R Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14758
  
  Romeo Labastida
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Romeo Labastida Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14761
  
  Reginald D. Caldwell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #34.00 Motion for Order Determing Value of Collateral re 2016 Ford Fusion Also #35
  EH
  
  Docket 13
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/23/2018
  BACKGROUND
  
  On June 4, 2018, Reginald Caldwell ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Among the assets of the estate is a 2016 Ford Fusion (the "Property"). On July 17, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to determine the value of the property. No opposition has been filed.
  
  Debtor’s motion contends that the value of the Property is $11,587, leaving an unsecured portion of $15,662. On August 7, 2018, Wells Fargo Bank filed a proof of claim ("Claim 7"), identifying a claim in the amount of $28,263.17, of which $11,650 is identified as secured.
  
  DISCUSSION
  
  One of the benefits of filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy is that under § 506(a) the debtor can bifurcate a secured, unavoidable debt, with one part representing the amount of
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Reginald D. Caldwell
  
  Chapter 13
  the value of the collateral, and the deficiency being treated as an unsecured claim. See In re Penrod, 636 F.3d 1175, 1177 (9th Cir. 2011).
  
  The Debtors assert that the Property’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $11,587, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $15,662. In support of its valuation, Debtor has provided an "expert" declaration, with the declaration coming from a paralegal at Debtor’s counsel’s firm.
  
  Given the absence of opposition to the motion, and the fact that Wells Fargo has already filed a proof of claim which identifies a value of the Property nearly identical to the proposed amount, the Court is inclined to accept Debtor’s valuation of $11,587. The Court notes, however, that because the instant motion is not a claim objection, Wells Fargo’s Claim 7 governs as to the amount of the total claim, and, thus, the unsecured portion.
  
  Therefore, Claim 7 will be treated as a secured claim in the amount of $11,587, and an unsecured claim in the amount of $16,676.17.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Reginald D. Caldwell Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Movant(s):
  Reginald D. Caldwell Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14761
  
  Reginald D. Caldwell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan
  
  Also #34 EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Reginald D. Caldwell Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14770
  
  Lamar Ramon Benjamin
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lamar Ramon Benjamin Represented By
  Ethan Kiwhan Chin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14773
  
  Juan I. Gallardo
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Juan I. Gallardo Represented By Tina H Trinh
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14775
  
  Ann Marie Pearson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Ann Marie Pearson Represented By Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14790
  
  Jorge Avendano Sosa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jorge Avendano Sosa Represented By Jaime A Cuevas
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14798
  
  Valerie A. Marrs
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Valerie A. Marrs Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14814
  
  Bernice D Johnson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/25/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Bernice D Johnson Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14816
  
  Daniel W. Sargent
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Daniel W. Sargent Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14833
  
  Miguel Cisneros
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Miguel Cisneros Represented By Andrew Nguyen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14836
  
  Omar Rosales
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Omar Rosales Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14849
  
  Pedro Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #45.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/26/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Pedro Ramirez Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14850
  
  Florence M Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #46.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Florence M Rodriguez Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14855
  
  Gregory Scott Curtis
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #47.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gregory Scott Curtis Represented By Michael E Clark
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14867
  
  Richard Cornelius and Naomi Rodriguez-Cornelius
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Cornelius Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Naomi Rodriguez-Cornelius Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14868
  
  Michael J Soriano
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael J Soriano Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14869
  
  Xavier Ramirez and Ana Ramirez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Xavier Ramirez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ana Ramirez Represented By
  Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14886
  
  Kimberly Michelle Giron
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/29/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Kimberly Michelle Giron Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14911
  
  Charles Anthony Amendola
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #52.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Charles Anthony Amendola Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14926
  
  Maria A Cabello
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #53.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Maria A Cabello Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14940
  
  Daniel Davison
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #54.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Daniel Davison Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14943
  
  Diana Rios Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #55.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Diana Rios Garcia Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-14949
  
  Alice Chow
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #56.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Alice Chow Represented By
  Andrew Nguyen
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15004
  
  Sheikh Azeem Akhtar
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #57.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Sheikh Azeem Akhtar Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15007
  
  Corinthia A. Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #58.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15020
  
  Miriam Torres
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #59.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Miriam Torres Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15033
  
  Victor Portillo
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #60.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Victor Portillo Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15049
  
  Marc Streage and Nicole Miller
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #61.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/3/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marc Streage Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Nicole Miller Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15051
  
  Rueben Anthony Castro and Adrian Marie Castro
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #62.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Rueben Anthony Castro Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Adrian Marie Castro Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:00 AM
  6:18-15057
  
  Jason Lawrence Hignite and Violet Sandy Hignite
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #63.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jason Lawrence Hignite Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Violet Sandy Hignite Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-18728
  
  Jeanette Johnson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #64.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 72
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jeanette Johnson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:13-26237
  
  Carlos Vincent Valdez and Grace G. Valdez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #65.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 69
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carlos Vincent Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Grace G. Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-13510
  
  Carmen Lucya Mendez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #66.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 97
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Carmen Lucya Mendez Represented By Sara E Razavi
  Matthew D. Resnik
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:14-23150
  
  Vivian Munson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #67.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 218
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-17922
  
  Homer Wilson and Evelyn Wilson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #68.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 114
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Homer Wilson Represented By Leonard J Cravens
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Evelyn Wilson Represented By Leonard J Cravens
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-20062
  
  Lilia Ivethe Fong
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #69.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Lilia Ivethe Fong Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:15-20998
  
  Eric Kissell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 72
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eric Kissell Represented By
  William J Howell
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-10319
  
  Otis Easter
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #71.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 130
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Otis Easter Represented By
  Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-12453
  
  Michael Joseph Fodor
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #72.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 58
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael Joseph Fodor Represented By Michael R Totaro Michael D Franco
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-13030
  
  Richard Hill Lindsay and Laura Lee Lindsay
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #73.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 109
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Richard Hill Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Laura Lee Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-13872
  
  Kimberly Ann Bowen
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #74.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 55
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Kimberly Ann Bowen Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-14987
  
  Susana Olga Corona
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #75.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency Also #76
  EH
  
  Docket 117
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Susana Olga Corona Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-14987
  
  Susana Olga Corona
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #76.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18
  Also #75 EH
  Docket 113
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Susana Olga Corona Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-15902
  
  Dinari Williams and Chandra Denman-Williams
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #77.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 41
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Dinari Williams Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Chandra Denman-Williams Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-16946
  
  Elliott Howard Blue, Jr and Yvette Blue
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #78.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 73
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elliott Howard Blue Jr Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Yvette Blue Represented By
  Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-17031
  
  Anderson L Pepper
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #79.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) Also #80
  EH
  
  Docket 80
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-17031
  
  Anderson L Pepper
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #80.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18
  Also #79 EH
  Docket 78
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-18009
  
  Carlos Garcia
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #81.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 90
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/2/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-18621
  
  John Wesley Wilson, Jr. and Michelle Janet Wilson
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #82.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 51
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  John Wesley Wilson Jr. Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Michelle Janet Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-19240
  
  Octavio Rubio Mata
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #83.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 32
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Octavio Rubio Mata Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:16-20133
  
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #84.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 68
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-10082
  
  Francisco R Palacios
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #85.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 152
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Francisco R Palacios Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11010
  
  Gary F Pico and Mercedes P. Pico
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #86.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 34
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Gary F Pico Represented By
  Patricia M Ashcraft
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Mercedes P. Pico Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11131
  
  Bruce Howard Ruggles and Ann Marie Ruggles
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #87.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 53
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Bruce Howard Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Ann Marie Ruggles Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-11538
  
  Michael Ray Sandoval
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #88.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 91
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michael Ray Sandoval Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-12647
  
  Joseph V. Lessa and Nichole Alyce Lessa
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #89.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 42
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  8/1/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Joseph V. Lessa Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Nichole Alyce Lessa Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13107
  
  Angel Benavidez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #90.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 36
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Angel Benavidez Represented By William P Mullins
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13539
  
  Albert Granados
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #91.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 29
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Albert Granados Represented By Jonathan D Doan
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13607
  
  Fernando Ramos
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #92.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 68
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/21/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Fernando Ramos Represented By Luis G Torres
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13729
  
  Paula Rosales
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #93.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 25
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Paula Rosales Represented By William Radcliffe
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-13923
  
  Suzanne Berry
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #94.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 28
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Suzanne Berry Represented By Christopher Hewitt
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-14187
  
  Andre J Booker and Carrie L Booker
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #95.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 40
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Andre J Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Carrie L Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15102
  
  Gwendolyn Washington
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #96.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 80
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos Jenny L Doling
  Movant(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15347
  
  Susan Violet Guillot
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #97.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 66
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/9/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15646
  
  Elida Soto
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #98.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency Also #99
  EH
  
  Docket 32
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elida Soto Represented By
  William G Cort
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15646
  
  Elida Soto
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #99.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18
  Also #98 EH
  Docket 30
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Elida Soto Represented By
  William G Cort
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-15772
  
  Annette Leshon Rudd
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #100.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 29
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Annette Leshon Rudd Represented By John F Brady
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-16409
  
  Jesse Norman Dofelmire and Roucelle Frias Dofelmire
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #101.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
  8/1/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jesse Norman Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Roucelle Frias Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-17189
  
  Earma Denise Young Washington and Marvin Ray
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #102.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Earma Denise Young Washington Represented By
  Brad Weil
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Marvin Ray Washington Represented By Brad Weil
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-17197
  
  Jose Munguia Valencia
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #103.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 116
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CH 7 ON 7/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Munguia Valencia Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Trustee(s):
  Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-17502
  
  Ray Valdepena, III
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #104.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 64
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/23/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ray Valdepena III Represented By Ryan A. Stubbe
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-17612
  
  Jose Guadalupe Sandoval
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #105.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 22
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Jose Guadalupe Sandoval Represented By Michael E Clark
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-18316
  
  Julio C. Davila
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #106.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 79
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/6/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Julio C. Davila Represented By Michael Jay Berger
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-18366
  
  Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #107.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 56
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-18777
  
  Josephine Theobald
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #108.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 33
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Josephine Theobald Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19790
  
  Angel Rodriguez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #109.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 30
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/22/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Angel Rodriguez Represented By Nancy Korompis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-19853
  
  Diego Lopez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #110.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 31
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Diego Lopez Represented By
  Julie J Villalobos
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:17-20434
  
  Michelle Singleton
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #111.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 34
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/10/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Michelle Singleton Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-10261
  
  Nereeka Tamar Haynes
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #112.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
  Docket 34
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/13/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Nereeka Tamar Haynes Represented By Dana Travis
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-10741
  
  Santiago A. Anonical, Jr. and Shallee V Anonical
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #113.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/2/18
  EH
  
  Docket 41
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-10873
  
  Evan Todd Flynn and Elizabeth Flynn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #114.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 85
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Evan Todd Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elizabeth Flynn Represented By Emilia N McAfee
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-10900
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #115.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency Also #116
  EH
  
  Docket 48
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-10900
  
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo and Michelle Kiklang Bernardino
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #116.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Return Refunds From: 7/23/18
  Also #115 EH
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Geth-Rang Jr. Takawo Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Michelle Kiklang Bernardino Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-11770
  
  Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #117.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 35
  *** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Raymond Burrola Represented By Elena Steers
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Estela Burrola Represented By Elena Steers
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  11:01 AM
  6:18-12189
  
  Keely J Barrett
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #118.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Keely J Barrett Represented By Carey C Pickford
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:12-27192
  
  Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 28114 Championship Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92555
  
  MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION From: 11/28/17, 1/23/18, 3/6/18, 4/10/18, 6/5/18, 7/10/18
  EH
  
  Docket 100
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/28/2017
  Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Debtors have provided evidence that regular payments were made between May 2016 and November 1, 2017 (with the exception of the August 2016 and December 2016 payments for which Debtors are seeking evidence). Exhibit 5, which is the Movant’s summary of post-petition payments reflects numerous debits for 2016 payments which appears to corroborate Debtors’ assertion that refunds were made due to a mix-up in payments being made by the Trustee’s office.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Achilles A. LaSalle Jr. Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Elsie LaSalle Represented By
  Lazaro E Fernandez
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Achilles A. LaSalle, Jr. and Elsie LaSalle
  
  Chapter 13
  HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By
  Armin M Kolenovic Debbie Hernandez Rosemary Allen Jamie D Hanawalt
  Trustee(s):
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR) Represented By
  Amrane (RS) Cohen (TR)
  10:00 AM
  6:14-16994
  
  Yolanda Llamas
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #2.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1345 West F Street, Ontario, CA 91762
  
  MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK
  
  From: 6/26/18, Adv fr. 8/31/18, 8/1/18 EH
  Docket 38
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  6/26/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
  DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Yolanda Llamas Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
  Movant(s):
  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Yolanda Llamas
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:16-19207
  
  Marquis Vincent Campbell
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 179 State Highway 173, Lake Arrowhead, CA 92352
  
  MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, N.A.
  
  From: 6/13/18 EH
  Docket 66
  *** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 6/19/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Marquis Vincent Campbell Represented By Eliza Ghanooni
  Movant(s):
  HSBC BANK (USA) N.A. Represented By April Harriott
  Matthew R. Clark III Sean C Ferry
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-16164
  
  William Richard Newborg and Serina Rae Newborg
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Chevrolet Equinox, VIN: 2GNALAEK0E1148227
  
  MOVANT: ACAR LEASING LTD DBA GM FINANCIAL LEASING
  
  EH
  
  Docket 51
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/17/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  William Richard Newborg Represented By
  Ramiro Flores Munoz
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Serina Rae Newborg Represented By
  Ramiro Flores Munoz
  Movant(s):
  ACAR Leasing LTD dba GM Represented By Jennifer H Wang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-17197
  
  Jose Munguia Valencia
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1094 Award Avenue, Colton, CA 92324
  
  MOVANT: TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 127
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jose Munguia Valencia Represented By Patricia A Mireles
  Movant(s):
  Trinity Financial Services LLC Represented By Richard J Reynolds
  Rafael R Garcia-Salgado
  Trustee(s):
  Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-18106
  
  Hugo Sanchez Cruz
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Nissan Versa, VIN: 3N1BC1CP5CK273661
  
  MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES INC DBA GM FINANCIAL
  
  EH
  
  Docket 39
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the § 1301 co-debtor stay
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Hugo Sanchez Cruz Represented By
  James Geoffrey Beirne
  Movant(s):
  AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. Represented By
  Jennifer H Wang
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:17-19771
  
  Patricia Anne Goffney
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6161 El Reposo Street San Bernardino, CA 92252
  
  MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
  
  From: 7/31/18 EH
  Docket 25
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Patricia Anne Goffney Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By
  Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Christina J O
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10355
  
  Heeyoung Lee Rhee
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #8.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 43928 Brookhaven Court, Temecula Area, CA 92592
  
  MOVANT: BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
  
  From: 6/26/18 EH
  Docket 20
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: Withdrawn
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). DENY pursuant to § 362(d)(1) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  
  6/26/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Pursuant to § 541, Debtor’s interest in her real property became property of the estate upon the commencement of the bankruptcy proceeding notwithstanding Debtor’s indication on her statement of intention that she intended to surrender the property.
  Pursuant to Trustee’s opposition, Trustee believes that there is sufficient equity in the property for it to be administered and Trustee has begun taking steps to do so. As
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Heeyoung Lee Rhee
  
  Chapter 7
  such, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing for Trustee to market the property.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Heeyoung Lee Rhee Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, as Represented By
  Nancy L Lee
  Trustee(s):
  Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-10864
  
  Jesus Manuel Remigio
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: Timeshare interest, 133 Vacation Points
  
  MOVANT: DPM ACQUISITION LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 40
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT as to relief from § 1301 co-debtor stay
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Jesus Manuel Remigio Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
  Movant(s):
  DPM Acquisition, LLC Represented By Thomas R Mulally
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-12170
  
  Pamela Ann Harris
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #10.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Honda Accord
  
  MOVANT: FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION
  
  From: 7/24/18, 8/21/18 EH
  Docket 31
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/24/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  7/24/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
  
  Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13172
  
  Michelle Cadena Quinn
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #11.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3656 N. Valley Court, San Bernardino, CA 92407
  
  MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION
  
  From: 6/13/18 EH
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert
  Movant(s):
  Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By Nichole Glowin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13775
  
  Maria D Lopez Ramirez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1272 82nd Avenue, Back Unit, Oakland, CA 94621
  
  MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST N.A.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 17
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for annulment of stay to validate postpetition acts. GRANT request as to ¶ 9 except that the request is granted "on recording".
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Maria D Lopez Ramirez Represented By Edgar P Lombera
  Movant(s):
  U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., AS Represented By Randall D Naiman
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-13906
  
  Ruby Lee Frazier
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 30902 Clubhouse Dr., Unit 27D, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
  
  MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
  
  EH
  
  Docket 36
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service: Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for waiver of co-debtor stay. GRANT as to ¶¶ 3 and 12. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ruby Lee Frazier Represented By Michael R Totaro
  Movant(s):
  THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Angie M Marth Wendy A Locke
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-15624
  
  Hugo Perez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2008 Weekend Warrior SLC3905, VIN: 5HRSS39358C022072
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 21
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. Request for APO is DENIED.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Hugo Perez Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Santander Consumer USA Inc., an Represented By
  Jennifer H Wang
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-15850
  
  Restart Solar, LLC
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2016 Chevrolet Colorado Vin # 1GCGSBE32G1239741
  
  MOVANT: ALLY FINANCIAL INC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 4
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  08/28/2018
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Restart Solar, LLC Represented By
  Sunil A Brahmbhatt
  Movant(s):
  Ally Financial Inc. Represented By Adam N Barasch
  Trustee(s):
  Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-16178
  
  Eriberto A. Sandoval
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 HONDA CIVIC, VIN: 19XF B2F5 4FE2 31485
  
  MOVANT: HONDA LEASE TRUST
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  8/28/18
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Eriberto A. Sandoval Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  HONDA LEASE TRUST Represented By Vincent V Frounjian
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:17-15717
  
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #17.00 Motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Federal Insurance Co., et al vs. AMJ Plumbing Specialist, docket number BC649108; Los Angeles Superior Court, Los Angeles
  
  MOVANT: FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY
  
  EH
  
  Docket 162
  Tentative Ruling:
  
  08/28/2018
  
  Service is Improper Opposition: None
  The Court finds that the attachment to the proof of service provides insufficient evidence of the parties served with the Motion and the manner of service. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to September 25, 2018, at 2:00
  p.m. for Movant to file and serve an Amended Notice of Motion and Motion with notice of the continued hearing date and a properly completed proof of service. The deadline for Movant to file the amended pleadings is September 3, 2018.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED.
  
  Debtor(s):
  
  Party Information
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
  David Lozano
  Movant(s):
  Emporium Hardwoods Operating Represented By
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.
  
  Susan M Benson
  
  Chapter 11
  2:00 PM
  6:18-10155
  
  Jose De Jesus Hernandez
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #18.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 NISSAN NV200, VIN # 3N6CM0KN1HK693415
  
  MOVANT: NISSAN- INFINITI LT
  
  EH
  
  Docket 78
  *** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/27/18
  Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By
    Eric Bensamochan
    Movant(s):
    NISSAN-INFINITI LT. Represented By
    Michael D Vanlochem
    2:00 PM
    6:18-16908
    
    Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #19.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
    (2) Requiring Status Report EH
    Docket 4
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
    Todd L Turoci
    2:00 PM
    6:18-15841
    
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #20.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order Authorizing Debtor to Honor Pre-Petition Contracts and Make Payments in the Ordinary Course of Business
    FINAL HEARING
    
    From: 7/17/18, 7/31/18 Also #21 & #22
    EH
    
    Docket 10
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Movant(s):
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:18-15841
    
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #21.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order (A) Prohibiting Utilities from Altering, Refusing, or Discontinuing Service; and (B) Deeming Utilities Adequate Assured of Future Performance Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 366
    
    From: 7/17/18 Also #20 & #22 EH
    Docket 8
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    Movant(s):
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    2:00 PM
    6:18-15841
    
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation
    
    Chapter 11
    
    #22.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
    (2) Requiring Status Report Also #20 & #21
    EH
    
    Docket 5
    
    Tentative Ruling:
  - NONE LISTED -
    
    Debtor(s):
    
    Party Information
    LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
    James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
    11:00 AM
    6:11-12704
    
    Jason Lopez and Julie Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #1.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien with Citibank National Association EH
    Docket 43
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/2018
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Citibank National Assocation.
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jason Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Julie Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Movant(s):
    Jason Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    Julie Lopez Represented By
    Gary Swanson Terrence Fantauzzi
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Jason Lopez and Julie Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    Christopher R Barclay (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:11-19270
    
    Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #2.00 Motion Objecting To Debtors Claims Of Exemption In Proceeds From Personal Injury Case Pursuant To CCP § 704.140(b)
    
    EH
    
    Docket 37
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On March 22, 2011, Rene Ferrer & Lucia Lopez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 27, 2011, Debtors received a discharge, and, one week later, the case was closed.
    
    On August 11, 2017, Debtors filed a motion to reopen case. On June 8, 2018, approximately ten months after the motion was filed, an order was entered granting the motion to reopen for Debtor to file amended schedules. Pursuant to this order, the Debtors were permitted until September 6, 2018, to amend the schedules. On June 29, 2018, Debtors amended Schedule B to identify a claim of unknown value related to a personal injury claim in pending litigation in case 2:13-ev-10975. Debtors also exempted the claim on Schedule C (the "Exemption"). On July 9, 2018, the Court granted Trustee’s application to employ Goe & Forsythe, LLP as general counsel.
    
    On July 25, 2018, Trustee filed a motion objecting to the Exemption. Trustee argues that Debtors cannot claim exemptions under both CAL. CIV. P. CODE §§ 703 and 704. Trustee further argues that Debtors should be precluded from amended their exemptions on the basis of equitable estoppel or quasi-estoppel. Finally, Trustee
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    appears to argue that the Court order permitting Debtors to amend their exemptions was improper in the absence of a Rule 9006 motion.
    
    Debtors concede that it was improper to claim exemptions pursuant to both CAL. CIV.
    P. CODE §§ 703 and 704, but argue that they should not be estopped from further amending their schedules to properly exempt the personal injury claim.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    CAL. CIV. P. CODE § 703.140(a)(1) states: "If spouses are joined in the petition, they jointly may elect to utilize the applicable exemption provisions of this chapter other than the provisions of subdivision (b), or to utilize the applicable exemptions set forth in subdivision (b), but not both." Debtors have conceded that it was improper to claims exemptions pursuant to both § 703 and § 704. Therefore, the Court will sustain Trustee’s objection and deny Debtors’ exemption.
    
    The Court declines to reach Trustee’s alternative arguments that estoppel principles should result in the denial of Debtors’ exemption.
    
    Trustee has also argued that Debtors failed to follow the procedural requirements for amending schedules after a case has been closed. The Court notes that there is case law which explicitly supports Trustee’s argument. See, e.g., In re Dollman, 583 B.R. 268, 271-73 (Bankr. D.N.M. 2017) (summarizing different approaches); 9 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1009.02[3] (16th ed. 2015) ("Once the case has been closed, a debtor may have to show excusable neglect in order to amend the schedule of exemptions."). There is also case law which explicitly disagrees with Trustee’s argument. See, e.g., In re Goswani, 304 B.R. 386, 392 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2003) ("If the drafters had intended to require court permission before the filing of amended schedules in reopened cases, they would have explicitly said so.").
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez
    
    Chapter 7
    Given the unsettled case law on this issue, the Court declines to reach this alternative argument at this point. Importantly, the Court notes, however, that there is currently an order on the docket allowing Debtors to file amended schedules until September 6, 2018. If Trustee believes this order was procedurally improper, a motion to reconsider might be warranted.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria
    Movant(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider
    Trustee(s):
    Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider
    11:00 AM
    6:13-26429
    
    Iraj Maqsoudi
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #3.00 CONT Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation From: 8/1/18
    EH
    
    Docket 112
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/1/18
    
    On October 3, 2013, Iraj Maqsoudi ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 14, 2014, Debtor obtained a discharge. On January 15, 2014, Trustee filed an application to employ Wesley H. Avery, APC ("Counsel") as general bankruptcy counsel. That application was approved by the Court on February 13, 2014.
    
    On January 21, 2014, Trustee filed a complaint against Mandana Banihashem for: (1) avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfer; (2) avoidance and recovery of preferential transfer; and (3) accounting and turnover. Ultimately, on September 4, 2015, Trustee prevailed on summary judgment with regard to nine of the eleven causes of action.
    
    On January 30, 2014, Trustee filed a complaint Debtor (1) to revoke the Debtor’s discharge; and (2) for an accounting and turnover. Ultimately, this adversary was voluntarily dismissed by Trustee on July 12, 2016.
    
    On December 2, 2015, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Neiman Realty ("Broker") as a real estate broker. On March 22, 2016, the Court approved the sale of certain real property located at 11889 Magnolia Ave., Riverside, CA 92503, which was the subject of the transfer adversary proceeding, for the amount of
    $692,000.
    
    On October 19, 2016, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Donald Fife ("Accountant") as accountant.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Iraj Maqsoudi
    
    Chapter 7
    
    On February 2, 2017, Counsel filed a fee application in the aggregate amount of
    $158,944.97.1 On April 3, 2017, Accountant filed a fee application in the aggregate amount of $2,401.10. Pursuant to Court order entered April 3, 2017, the Court also allowed an administrative expense for the attorney for creditor Mustafa Mayar, who conducted an examination of Debtor in the case, in the total amount of $8,491.02.
    
    11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) (2005) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. After a review of Counsel’s fee application, the Court has significant concerns with the amount requested, primarily based upon the excessiveness of the amounts billed, and the fact that the entire case was billed at $475/hour without any time billed by associations or paralegals at lower rates. For example, the first day that Counsel worked on the case, January 13, 2014, Counsel lists the following time entries (with the amount charged):
    
    -Telephone conference with the Trustee regarding new matter: $95
    -Review of encumbrances against commercial building and calculation of approximate fair market value: $712.50
    -Review of motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor: $427.50
    -Legal research in support of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor: $237.50
    -Preparation of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor, and preparation of Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof: $2,042.50
    -Preparation of declarations in support of Trustee’s opposition to motion for relief from stay filed by judgment creditor; telephone call with the Trustee’s broker re same: $1,330
    -Review and analysis of Notice of Claims Bar Date: $95
    -Review of encumbrances against residence and calculation of approximate fair market value: $570.
    
    The Court notes the following concerns with Counsel’s billing on the first day on the case. First, 4.3 hours for the opposition and points and authorities appears excessive, given that the documents contain two paragraphs, two additional sentences, and some "fill-in-the-blank" responses. Second, 2.8 hours for the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Iraj Maqsoudi
    declarations appears excessive, given that each declaration is approximately one-
    
    Chapter 7
    page long. Third, the totality of 11.6 hours for what constituted opposing the relief from stay and, possibly, some minor case research, appears excessive. This is especially true in light of the fact that by the time Counsel had completed the opposition to the relief from stay, it had billed 10.2 hours for the day. The opposition, however, was filed at 3:50 p,m,, implying that the telephone conference with the Trustee must have started no later than 5:38 a.m., even if Counsel worked continuously on the matter thereafter.
    
    The issues noted above are not the exception in the billing summary submitted by Counsel, but, rather, the trend. Similarly, on March 10th and 11, 2014, Counsel billed nine hours for opposing Debtor’s motion to convert to Chapter 13; Trustee’s opposition was not extensive and Debtor’s schedules indicated he had no disposable income at the time. Likewise, on October 31-November 1, 2016, Counsel billed 7.4 hours for preparation of the fee application narrative, which is approximately five pages long and mostly form language. Finally, between May 28, 2015 and June 10, 2015, Counsel billed 21.8 hours for the preparation of the pleadings related to the summary judgment motion in the § 548 adversary proceeding, which appears to include more than seven hours billed for the preparation of the Trustee’s real estate broker’s declaration, a declaration which was approximately a page and contained various broker documents as exhibits.
    
    Additionally, Counsel’s billing entries appear to include excessive charges for relatively routine tasks. The following are some of the examples:
    
    1/16/14 – "Review of the discharge of the Debtor" -- $47.50
    3/25/14 – "Review and analysis of tentative ruling for status conference" -- $95 4/30/14—"Preparation of request for mediation and order thereon" (two entries) --
    $950
    7/19/14 – "Review and analysis of Mediator’s certificate" (two entries) -- $95 10/14/15-10/15/14 –Preparation of status reports for two status conferences --
    $1,975
    12/3/15 -- Preparation of two, relatively simple orders -- $950
    
    While the issues noted above may be representative of the concerns with Counsel’s fee application, the issues are by no means limited to the entries listed
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Iraj Maqsoudi
    above.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Iraj Maqsoudi Represented By
    Thomas W Gillen - DISBARRED - John F Brady
    Trustee(s):
    John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Wesley H Avery
    11:00 AM
    6:15-20888
    
    Walter Ray Henderson and Anne Budell Henderson
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #4.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 70
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/2018
    
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 2,819.34 Trustee Expenses: $ 728.64
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Walter Ray Henderson Represented By Alec L Harshey
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Anne Budell Henderson Represented By Alec L Harshey
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Walter Ray Henderson and Anne Budell Henderson
    
    Chapter 7
    Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:16-18343
    
    Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #5.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
    Docket 71
    
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/2018
    No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.
    
    The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
    
    Trustee Fees: $ 2,606.72 Trustee Expenses: $ 436.57
    
    APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Jose Sebastian Olvera Jr Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Angela Joanne Olvera Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
    Trustee(s):
    Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Jose Sebastian Olvera, Jr and Angela Joanne Olvera
    
    Chapter 7
    11:00 AM
    6:17-14023
    
    Yvonne L Sanchez and Oscar Sanchez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #6.00 Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 between Larry D. Simons, Chapter 7 trustee and debtors
    
    EH
    
    Docket 40
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On May 12, 2017, Yvonne & Oscar Sanchez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Included on Schedule A was certain real property located at 5202 El Sueno St., San Antonio, TX 78233 (the "Property"). Trustee asserts that there is non-exempt equity in the Property
    
    On July 24, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to approve compromise pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019. Trustee proposes to sell the non-exempt equity in the property to Debtor for $10,000.
    
    DISCUSSION
    
    FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019 provides that:
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Yvonne L Sanchez and Oscar Sanchez
    
    Chapter 7
    
    On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct.
    
    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have previously outlined the factors to be considered in approving a compromise pursuant to Rule 9019: (1) the probability of success in the litigation; (2) the difficulties to be encountered in the matter of collection; (3) the complexity, expense, inconvenience and delay of litigation; and (4) the interest of creditors with deference to their reasonable. See In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986). The listed factors assist the Court in determining "the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of a proposed settlement agreement." Id.
    
    Trustee’s compromise motion does not provide the information the Court requires to apply the A&C Properties factors or to assess the reasonableness of the settlement because the motion fails to identify the value of the Property or estimate the value of the non-exempt equity in the Property, rendering it impossible to determining the reasonableness of the settlement amount.
    
    In the absence of any evidence regarding the value of the Property or the value of the non-exempt equity in the Property, the Court cannot approve the compromise when only vague and general arguments have advanced in support of the compromise.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for Trustee to file a supplemental declaration.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Yvonne L Sanchez and Oscar Sanchez
    
    Chapter 7
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Yvonne L Sanchez Pro Se
    Joint Debtor(s):
    Oscar Sanchez Pro Se
    Movant(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    Trustee(s):
    Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
    11:00 AM
    6:17-15043
    
    Sandra Lou Harter and Joseph Harter
    
    Chapter 7
    
    #7.00 Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Sale of Estates Right, Title and Interest in Real Property Free and Clear of Liens; (2) Approving Overbid Procedure; (3) Approving Payment of Real Estate Brokers Commissions; and (4) Finding Purchasers are Good Faith Purchasers
    
    EH
    
    Docket 46
    Tentative Ruling:
    8/29/18
    BACKGROUND
    
    On June 6, 2017, Sandra Harter ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On Schedule A, Debtor listed certain secondary real property located at 9628 7th St., Victorville, CA 92392 (the "Property"). On Schedule C, Debtor claimed an exemption in the Property in the amount of $175,000. On January 18, 2018, the Court approved a stipulation between Trustee and Debtor whereby Debtor would carve-out $40,000 of the scheduled exemption for the benefit of the estate. On February 27, 2018, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Levene, Neal, Bender, Yoo & Brill L.L.P. as general counsel. On April 23, 2018, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Steven Speier as real estate broker.
    
    On August 8, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for an order: "(1) authorizing sale of estate’s right, title and interest in real property free and clear of liens; (2) approving overbid procedures; (3) approving payment of real estate broker’s commissions; and
4. finding purchasers are a [sic] good faith purchasers." The proposed sale price is
  $360,000. Trustee proposes to pay $132,000 to secured creditor Quicken Loans ("Creditor"), $135,000 for Debtor’s exemption, and $28,800 for closing costs. The remaining $64,200 will accrue to the bankruptcy estate.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Sandra Lou Harter and Joseph Harter
  
  Chapter 7
  
  On August 15, 2018, Creditor filed a conditional non-opposition to the sale motion. Creditor requests that the sale be conditioned on full payment of Creditor’s lien "per a written, current payoff demand." From a review of the contents of the Motion filed, specifically the proposed distribution of sale proceeds, it is the Court’s understanding that Trustee intends to satisfy the concerns of Creditor.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Sale of Estate Property
    
    11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1) allows a trustee to sell property of the estate outside of the ordinary course, after notice and a hearing. A sale pursuant to § 363(b) requires a demonstration that the sale has a valid business justification. In re 240 North Brand Parners, Ltd., 200 B.R. 653, 659 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1996). "In approving any sale outside the ordinary course of business, the court must not only articulate a sufficient business reason for the sale, it must further find it is in the best interest of the estate,
    i.e. it is fair and reasonable, that it has been given adequate marketing, that it has been negotiated and proposed in good faith, that the purchaser is proceeding in good faith, and that it is an "arms-length" transaction." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal.).
    
    While the motion contains minimal evidence of the Property’s proposed marketing, Trustee has also secured a carve-out from Debtor’s exemption and the purchase price is higher than the value of the Property identified on the schedules. Given the fact that the sale appears to be a good faith, arms-length transaction, and the fact that the estate would receive $64,200 for distribution to unsecured creditors, the Court concludes that Trustee has articulated an adequate business reason for the sale.
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Sandra Lou Harter and Joseph Harter
  2. Sale Free & Clear of Liens
    
    Chapter 7
    
    11 U.S.C. § 363(f) (2010) states:
    1. The trustee may sell property under subsection (b) or (c) of this section free and clear of any interest in such property of an entity other than the estate, only if-
      1. applicable nonbankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest;
      2. such entity consents;
      3. such interest is a lien and the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on such property;
      4. such interest is in bona fide dispute; or
      5. such entity could be compelled, in a legal or equitable proceeding, to accept a money satisfaction of such interest.
    Trustee contends that § 363(f)(3) is applicable. First, Trustee contends that aggregate value of all encumbrances on the property is $132,000, which is exceeded by the purchase price of $360,000.
    
    Because Trustee has established that § 363(f)(3) is applicable, Trustee has met its burden in securing a sale free and clear of liens.
  3. 14-Day Stay
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Sandra Lou Harter and Joseph Harter
    
    Chapter 7
    FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(h) states: "An order authorizing the use, sale, or lease of property other than cash collateral is stayed until the expiration of 14 days after entry of the order, unless the court orders otherwise." The Court deems the absence of objections to be consent to the relief requested, pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), and, therefore, will waive the stay of Rule 6004(h).
  4. Miscellaneous Provisions

The Court has reviewed the remainder of Trustee’s miscellaneous requests. The Court has reviewed the proposed overbidding procedures and finds such procedures to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed the requested Broker compensation of 6% of the sale price (totaling $21,600) and finds such compensation to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed Trustee’s proposed distribution of sale proceeds, and the Court finds that such distribution is reasonable and proper.

Finally, the Court has reviewed the declarations of the purchasers, Oscar and Ana Garcia (the "Garcias"), and finds the declarations sufficient for a determination that the Garcias are good faith purchasers pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363 (m).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion in its entirety. Specifically, the Court is inclined to authorize the sale of the Property free and clear of liens, approve the overbid procedures, approve the Broker’s compensation, determine that the Garcias are good faith purchasers and waive the 14-day stay under Rule 6004(h).

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Sandra Lou Harter and Joseph Harter

Chapter 7

Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy

Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy

Anthony A Friedman

11:00 AM

6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Chapter 7 #8.00 Chapter 7 Trustee's Motion for Order Compelling Turnover of Real Property of the Estate

Docket 86

Tentative Ruling:

NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.

#9.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment From: 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 4/11/18, 6/13/18, 8/22/18
EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Defendant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Plaintiff(s):
Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#10.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with Persolve, Inc.

Also #11 - #16

EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Persolve, Inc.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#11.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with Unifund Also #10 - #16
EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Unifund.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#12.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with Citibank Also #10 - #16
EH

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Citibank.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#13.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with Western States Also #10 - #16
EH

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Western States.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#14.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with Investment Retrievers Also #10 - #16
EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of Investment Retrievers.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
11:00 AM
CONT...

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#15.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with American Express Also #10 - #16
EH

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of American Express.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-17625

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion to Avoid Judicial lien with JP Morgan Chase Also #10 - #15
EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
8/29/2018

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the lien of JP Morgan Chase.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber
Movant(s):
Rajpal Singh Grewal Represented By Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber
Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rajpal Singh Grewal and Kanwalpreet Kaur Grewal
Brad Weil Brad Weil
Stuart G Steingraber Stuart G Steingraber

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:16-15813

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01138 Speier v. Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC et al

#17.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Pursuant of Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)

Also #18 EH
Docket 5
Tentative Ruling:
8/29/18
BACKGROUND

On June 29, 2016, John & Ellen Tackett ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On August 24, 2016, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ Goe & Forsythe, LLP as Trustee’s counsel. On October 11, 2016, Debtors received a discharge.

On November 14, 2016, the Court granted Trustee’s motion objecting to exemptions claimed in a Provident Trust Group account and in certain real property located in El Segundo.

On December 7, 2017, Trustee filed a motion for a Rule 2004 examination of Debtors. This motion was granted on January 2, 2018, and that matter was ultimately resolved on June 14, 2018.
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
On June 20, 2018, Trustee filed a complaint for: (a) breach of written contract; (b) rescission and restitution for fraud; (c) money had and received; (d) unjust enrichment; (e) fraud; (f) negligent misrepresentation; (g) negligence; (h) rescission and restitution for sale of unqualified securities; (i) damages for sale of unqualified securities; (j) rescission: securities: misrepresentation; (k) damages: securities: misrepresentation; (l) contempt for willful violation of automatic stay pursuant to 11
U.S.C. § 105; and (m) elder financial abuse. The complaint names as defendants: (1) Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC; (2) Conestoga International Holdings LLC; (3) Conestoga Trust; (4) Provident Trust Group, LLC; (5) De Leon & Washburn, P.C.; (6) Jeff Converse; (7) Michael Woods; (8) Michael McDermott; (9) Thomas Washburn; and (10) Hector De Leon.1

On July 30, 2018, Hector De Leon, De Leon & Washburn, P.C., and Thomas Washburn (collectively, the "De Leon Defendants") filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On August 15, 2018, Trustee filed its opposition.

DISCUSSION
1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
  
  In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)); see also Burgert v. Lokelani Bernice Pauahi Bishop Trust, 200 F.3d 661, 663 (9th Cir. 2000) ("All allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party."). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
2. LEGAL ANALYSIS
  
  Chapter 7
  
  As noted in footnote 1, the causes of action which are directed against the De Leon Defendants are causes of action (h) and (j)-(m). The De Leon Defendants’ summarize their argument in the following language:
  
  Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted as against the De Leon Defendants because (1) the agent’s immunity rule bars all of Plaintiff’s claims; (2) California public policy precludes Plaintiff’s claims;
  (3) Plaintiff has failed to state viable securities laws claims because the Complaint does not contain facts establishing materially [sic] assistance in the violations at issue; (4) Plaintiff has not pled securities fraud with the requisite particularity; (5) Plaintiff has not pled a viable elder abuse claim; and (6) Plaintiff has not pled a viable claim for violation of the automatic stay.
  
  [Dkt. No. 5, pg. 2, lines 12-18].
  
  A. Agent’s Immunity Rule
  The De Leon Defendants first argument, and the argument most thoroughly briefed, is that "all of Plaintiff’s claims implicate the agent’s immunity rule, because they are predicated on the notion that the De Leon Defendants conspired or aided its client/principal, Conestoga, in committing securities fraud or a violation of the automatic stay.
  
  The parties not only disagree on the application of the appropriate legal standard to the facts of this case, they disagree on the legal standard itself. The De Leon Defendants appear to derive their proffered standard from Klotz v. Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, 238 Cal. App. 4th 1339, 1351 (Cal. App. 2015). The Court is skeptical that Klotz represents the appropriate guiding case on the agent’s immunity rule for two reasons: (1) neither the word "agent" nor the word "immunity" appear in
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  
  Chapter 7
  the case at all; and (2) the standard set forth in Klotz is a statutory creation.2 Specifically, CAL. CIV. CODE § 1714.10(a),(c) state the following:
  1. No cause of action against an attorney for a civil conspiracy with his or her client arising from any attempt to contest or compromise a claim or dispute, and which is based upon the attorney’s representation of the client, shall be included in a complaint or other pleading unless the court enters an order allowing the pleading that includes the claim for civil conspiracy to be filed after the court determines that the party seeking to file the pleading has established that there is a reasonable probability that the party will prevail in the action. The court may allow the filing of a pleading claiming liability based upon such a civil conspiracy following the filing of a verified petition therefor accompanied by the proposed pleading and supporting affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability is based. The court shall order service of the petition upon the party against whom the action is proposed to be filed and permit that party to submit opposing affidavits prior to making its determination. The filing of the petition, proposed pleading, and accompanying affidavits shall toll the running of any applicable statute of limitations until the final determination of the matter, which ruling, if favorable to the petitioning party, shall permit the proposed pleading to be filed.
    
    (c) This section shall not apply to a cause of action against an attorney for a civil conspiracy with his or her client, where (1) the attorney has an independent legal duty to the plaintiff, or (2) the attorney’s acts go beyond the performance of a professional duty to serve the client and involve a conspiracy to violate a legal duty in furtherance of the attorney’s financial gain.
    
    The analysis of this statutory must begin with a determination regarding whether
    § 1714.10(a) is applicable at all to the instant situation. As noted by Trustee, the plain language of the statute states that it governs conspiracy which arises "from any attempt to contest or compromise a claim or dispute." Here, the work engaged in by the De Leon Defendants does not fit the statutory language – it was transactional work. See, e.g., Stueve v. Berger Kahn, 222 Cal. App. 4th 327, 331 (Cal. Ct. App.
    2013) ("Rather, they say, the claims arose from transactional activities . . . [w]e must agree that the alleged schemes do not fall within the plain wording of section 1714.10, subdivision (a)."). Therefore CAL. CIV. CODE § 1714.10(a) does not directly govern the
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    John E. Tackett
    
    Chapter 7
    instant situation.
    
    Nevertheless, while the gatekeeping function of CAL. CIV. CODE § 1714.10(a) may not be directly invoked by the present situation, it appears that the statute, in part, serves as a codification of the agent immunity rule. See Richards v. Cnty. of L.A., 2017 WL 7411159 at *4, n.2 (C.D. Cal. 2017) ("The California Legislature amended California Civil Code § 1714.10 pursuant to the California Supreme Court’s decision in Doctors’ Co. v. Superior Court, 49 Cal. 3d 39 (Cal. 1989), which established the agent’s immunity doctrine. Considering that § 1714.10 effectively codified the agent’s immunity rale [sic], the Court will discuss the immunity and statutory defenses together.") (citation omitted). Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit has recently used the standard set forth in CAL. CIV. CODE § 1714.10 to describe the agent’s immunity rule:
    
    The Agent’s Immunity Rule shields an attorney who merely acted as an agent or employee of a third party when the third party had a duty to the plaintiff.
    The Rule does not shield an attorney who had an independent legal duty to the plaintiff, or an attorney who went beyond a professional duty as part of a conspiracy for attorney’s financial gain.
    
    ESG Capital Partners, LP v. Stratos, 828 F.3d 1023, 1037 (9th Cir. 2016). It does not appear that there is any allegation in the complaint that the latter half of the above exception is applicable here, so the Court will instead focus on whether the De Leon Defendants had an independent legal duty to Debtors.
    
    As conceded by the De Leon Defendants, an attorney has a legal duty to "refrain from defrauding nonclients." Id. (quoting Rickley v. Goodfriend, 212 Cal. App. 4th 1136, 1151 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) ("It is well established that an attorney has an independent legal duty to refrain from defrauding nonclients."). Therefore, the operative question is whether the allegations that the De Leon Defendants provided material assistance in an alleged securities fraud violation are sufficient to constitute an allegation that the De Leon Defendants breached their legal duty to refrain from defrauding nonclients.
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    John E. Tackett
3. Material Assistance in Securities Violation
  
  Chapter 7
  
  As noted by the De Leon Defendants, while not cited in the complaint, Trustee appears to rely upon CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504.1 in making the argument that the De Leon Defendants are liable for materially assisting in the alleged securities violations. The De Leon Defendants, in their argument, cite AREI II Cases, 216 Cal. App. 4th 1004, 1014 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013), which states: "it is not enough that a person provided material assistance in a larger scheme to defraud if that person had no role or involvement in the part of the scheme that constituted a violation of the securities." The De Leon Defendants then assert that: "the De Leon Defendants are alleged to have occupied a more structural role with respect to the marketing of the alleged securities – i.e., the De Leon Defendants, by virtue of their role as counsel, performed work that enabled Conestoga to do business."
  
  The above characterization of the allegations in the complaint understate the alleged role of the De Leon Defendants. The final section of the eighth, tenth, and eleventh claims for relief states the following:
  
  At the time of the acts alleged herein, DL&W, Washburn, and De Leon, in their capacity as counsel to Conestoga for the structuring of the transactions complained of herein, materially assisted in the sale of the securities in violation of law, in that they knew it was Conestoga’s practice to sell unregistered securities through unregistered agents, knowing that victims of the schemes would be induced to sign disclosures concerning accredited- investor status that the Trustee is informed and believes DL&W, Washburn, and/or De Leon prepared for Conestoga, and in fact conspired with Conestoga to facilitate such non-accredited investors to sign those documents. In so acting, DL&W, Washburn and De Leon acted with intent to deceived or defraud.
  
  [Dkt. No. 1, pg. 24 lines 7-15] (emphasis added). As stated by AREI II Cases:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  To support liability under section 25504.1 for such a violation, the complaint must include allegations demonstrating how the defendant assisted in the act of selling or offering to sell securities by means of false and misleading statements. Such assistance may take the form of aiding in the preparation of offering documents relied upon by investors, communicating misrepresentations directly to investors, or otherwise playing a material, facilitating role in the act of selling or attempting to sell the securities by means of misrepresentations or omissions of material fact.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Id. at 1015 (emphasis added); see also Schaffer Family Invs., LLC v. Sonnier, 120 F. Supp. 3d 1028, 1045 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (same). The crux of the complaint is that the De Leon Defendants provided services which were directly instrumental in committing the alleged securities violations, not that the De Leon Defendants provided some peripheral services which happened to have been utilized in connection with the alleged violations. Therefore, the Court rejects the De Leon Defendants argument that Trustee has failed to adequately plead a violation of CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504.1.
  
  Now the Court must return to the question of whether an allegation that the De Leon Defendants violated CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504.1 constitutes an allegation that the De Leon Defendants violated their duty to refrain from defrauding Debtors. Returning to the origin of CAL. CIV. CODE § 1714.10, Doctors’ Co. v. Superior Court, 49 Cal. 3d 39 (Cal. 1989), the California Supreme Court stated the following:
  
  The attorneys in Gruenberg were relieved from liability for helping their insurer-clients to violate the latter’s duty of good faith and fair dealing not because the duty was contractual but because it was a duty peculiar to the insurers, not shared by their attorneys. The duty invoked here (and in Wolfrich) is likewise peculiar to the insured because the duty is created by a statute which imposes it only on persons in the insurance business. . .
  
  Finally, we anticipate that the impact of our holding, barring liability of employees or agents for conspiracy to cause their principal to violate a duty
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  that is binding on the principal alone, will be relatively narrow where the violated duty is other than contractual. The duties imposed by section 790.03 are somewhat unusual in that their application is expressly restricted to "persons engaged in the business of insurance." The binding effect of many other statutory duties is not subject to such restrictions.
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Id. at 46, 48 (citations omitted). Here, the statutory scheme outlined in CAL. CORP. CODE § 25500 et. seq. imposes duties on both the principal, and the agent, albeit a higher standard on the former. See Siegal v. Gamble, 2016 WL 1085787 at *6 (N.D. Cal. 2016) ("Liability for securities violations also extends to the primary violator’s employees and to those who materially aid a primary section 25401 violator who deals in securities. This means that agents, associates, affiliates, and broker-dealers may be ‘secondarily’ liable if they act with the ‘intent to deceive or defraud.’") (emphasis added) (citation omitted). Therefore, because the relevant statutory scheme also imposes a duty on those providing material assistance to the primary wrongdoer, the De Leon Defendants cannot use the agent immunity rule to bar the suit.
4. Public Policy/Privilege
  
  The De Leon Defendants next argue that: "[p]ublic policy therefore requires the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims, because the existence of the [attorney-client] privilege prevents the De Leon Defendants from mounting a defense." [Dkt. No. 5, pg. 13, lines 4-5]. The Court concludes that this argument is premature at this stage. As stated in Reilly v. Greenwald & Hoffman, LLP, the Court must consider whether:
  
  (1) The evidence at issue is the client’s confidential information, and the client insists that it remain confidential; (2) given the nature of plaintiff’s claim the confidential information is highly material to the defendants’ defenses;
  (3) there are "ad hoc" measures available to avoid dismissal such as "sealing and protective orders, limited admissibility of evidence, orders restricting the use of testimony in successive proceedings, and, where appropriate, in camera proceedings; and (4) it would be fundamentally unfair to proceed
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  
  Chapter 7
  
  196 Cal. App. 4th 891, 904 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011); see also Dietz v. Meisenheimer & Herron, 177 Cal. App. 4th 771 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009); Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Superior Court, 7 Cal. 4th 1164 (Cal. 1994).
  
  Here, the Court is unable to properly consider the above factors at this stage. First, at this point, the client at issue has not insisted the information remain confidential.
  Second, it is not clear whether the confidential information is highly material to the defense. Third, the Court has a variety of "ad hoc" measures which could be employed to at least somewhat address this issue. Finally, the Court notes that it is unclear, at this point, whether the crime/fraud exception outlined in CAL. EVID. CODE § 956 may be applicable in this situation. For all of these reasons, the Court concludes it would be premature to dismiss the action on this ground at this time.
5. Exempt Transactions
  
  The De Leon Defendants next argue that CAL. CORP. CODE § 25102 exempts the specific transaction at issue from the qualification requirements of § 25110. Section 25102(q)(1) states, in part:
  1. Any offer or sale of any viatical or life settlement contract or fractionalized or pooled interest therein in a transaction that meets all of the following criteria:
    1. Sales of securities described in this subdivision are made only to qualified purchasers or other persons the issuer reasonably believes, after reasonable inquiry, to be qualified purchasers. A corporation, partnership, or other organization specifically formed for the purpose of acquiring the securities offered by the issuer in reliance upon this exemption may be a qualified purchaser only if each of
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  the equity owners of the corporation, partnership, or other organization is a qualified purchaser. Qualified purchasers include the following: . . .
  
  Chapter 7
  
  The Court agrees with Trustee that it is not the mindset of the De Leon Defendants, but rather the mindset of the issuer, that is material when considering the application of the above exception. The Court finds that the complaint plausibly alleges that the issuer here did not reasonably believe the Tacketts were qualified investors.
6. Fraud-Particularity
  
  The De Leon Defendants next argue that the complaint fails to plead fraud with particularity. Specifically, the De Leon Defendants argue that PSLRA imposes heightened pleading requirements, and that "[d]istrict courts have applied the PSLRA’s exacting standards to attempts to plead securities fraud under California’s Blue Sky laws." [Dkt. No. 5, pg. 17, lines 10-13]. The cases cited by the De Leon Defendants in support of the latter half of that contention, however, do not support the point. Specifically, both Mueller and Mausner involve the application of PSLRA standards to claims brought under that act, regardless of whether the complaint contained additional causes of action pursuant to California state law. See, e.g., Mausner v. Marketbyte LLC 2013 WL 12073832 at *6 (S.D. Cal. 2013). Nevertheless, as stated by Mausner: "Similar to PSLRA’s heightened pleading requirement for the alleged misrepresentation or omission, Rule 9(b) requires that the complaint ‘state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud.’ The Ninth Circuit has applied Rule 9(b)’s requirements to federal securities fraud claims." Id.
  
  FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b) provides that: "[i]n alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake." Here, it is unclear whether the complaint alleges that the De Leon Defendants, themselves, committed a fraudulent act. While the tenth claim for relief, and the corresponding background sections of the complaint, contain sufficiently detailed allegations of the statements made by Jeff Converse, the Court agrees with the De Leon Defendants that the complaint does not contain adequately detailed allegations of fraud committed by the De Leon Defendants. Furthermore, given that CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504.1
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  John E. Tackett
  
  Chapter 7
  ostensibly provides for liability for someone who provides material assistance to someone else who is committed fraud, it is not clear whether the complaint needs to contain allegations of fraud specifically against the De Leon Defendants.
  
  Given that the determination of whether the alleged conducted of the De Leon Defendants constitutes fraud may have significant consequence in relation to the attorney-client privilege, the Court is not inclined to decide the issue on the record before it.3 If the De Leon Defendants wish to continue with their argument, construed as a Rule 9(b) argument, then the Court desires further briefing from both parties on whether the alleged conduct of the De Leon Defendants needs to be, or is intended to be, itself characterized as fraud.
7. Elder Abuse
  
  The Court notes that the allegations contained in the thirteenth claim for relief, sections 138-149 of the complaint, do not appear to allege any action taken by the De Leon Defendants which could constitute elder abuse after Mr. Tackett turned sixty- five years old. Specifically, the Court notes that section 144, the section of the thirteenth claim for relief which deals with actions taken by the De Leon Defendants, does not refer to any action taken with respect to Mr. Tackett that would have occurred after Mr. Tackett turned sixty-five years old. Instead, the complaint recites the exact same language as the securities violations claims for relief, describing action which results to the preparation of documents related to the alleged sale of securities. Furthermore, section 138’s reference to the background section does not remedy the deficiency, because the only action imputed to the De Leon Defendants at the relevant time period concerns settlement efforts with the Trustee. Regardless of whether such settlement efforts were undergone in good faith, such efforts simply do not appear to fit within the statutory definition of elder abuse.
8. Automatic Stay
The Court agrees with the De Leon Defendants that Trustee has failed to allege a
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
willful violation on the part of the De Leon Defendants. Specifically, the Court notes the following operative section of the complaint:

DL&W, Washburn, and De Leon participated in Conestoga’s violation of the automatic stay, by colluding with Conestoga to engage in a pretense of "settlement" discussions – with knowledge of the bankruptcy stay – while Conestoga proceeded to empty out the Tacketts’ interest in the Policies, and then abruptly withdrawn Conestoga’s purported settlement offer.

[Dkt. No. 1, pg 30]. The Court concludes that the above allegations are insufficient to constitute an automatic stay violation under 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) for the following reasons. First, engaging in settlement discussions with the Chapter 7 Trustee is common and not, itself an automatic stay violation. Second, unlike the claims for relief related to securities violations, there is no specific statutory section which imposes a duty on an attorney (or an agent) to refrain from providing assistance to an action which violates the automatic stay. Finally, unlike the cases cited by Trustee, Trustee has not alleged a direct action by the De Leon Defendants which violated the automatic stay. Therefore, because Trustee cannot rely on the "assistance theory" in the context of an automatic stay violation, the twelfth claim for reliefs fails as to the De Leon Defendants.

TENTATIVE RULING
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to GRANT the De Leon Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Twelfth and Thirteenth Claims for Relief, without prejudice, and DENY the De Leon Defendants’ motion to dismiss with regard to the Eighth, Ten, and Eleventh Claims for Relief, subject to discussion regarding whether the Complaint needs to, or is intended to, contain allegations of fraudulent conduct on the part of the De Leon Defendants themselves.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
John E. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Defendant(s):
Michael McDermott Pro Se
Michael Woods Pro Se
Hector De Leon Represented By Jasmin Yang
Thomas Washburn Represented By Jasmin Yang
Jeff Converse Pro Se
Provident Trust Group, LLC Represented By Marshall J Hogan
Conestoga Trust Pro Se
Conestoga International Holdings, Pro Se Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC Pro Se
De Leon & Washburh, P.C. Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Jasmin Yang

Chapter 7
Joint Debtor(s):
Ellen O. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Movant(s):
De Leon & Washburh, P.C. Represented By Jasmin Yang
Thomas Washburn Represented By Jasmin Yang
Hector De Leon Represented By Jasmin Yang
Plaintiff(s):
Steven M Speier Represented By Thomas J Eastmond Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:16-15813

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01138 Speier v. Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC et al

#18.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01138. Complaint by Steven M Speier against Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC, Conestoga International Holdings, LLC, Conestoga Trust, Provident Trust Group, LLC, De Leon & Washburh, P.C., Thomas Washburn, Hector De Leon, Jeff Converse, Michael Woods, Michael McDermott. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Breach of Written Contract; (2) Rescission and Restitution for Fraud; (3) Money Had and Received; (4) Unjust Enrichment; (5) Fraud; (6) Negligent Representation; (7) Negligence; (8) Rescission and Restitution for Sale of Unqualified Securities [Cal. Corp. §25503]; (9) Damages for Sale of Unqualified Securities [Cal. Corp.
§25503]; (10) Rescission: Securities: Misrepresentation [Cal. Corp. §25501];
(11) Damages: Securities: Misrepresentation [Cal. Corp. §25501]; (12) Contempt for Willful Violation of Automatic Stay Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105; and (13) Elder Financial Abuse [Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15600 et seq.] Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) (Eastmond, Thomas)

Also #17 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John E. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Defendant(s):
Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC Pro Se Conestoga International Holdings, Pro Se Conestoga Trust Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
Provident Trust Group, LLC Represented By Marshall J Hogan
De Leon & Washburh, P.C. Represented By Jasmin Yang
Thomas Washburn Represented By Jasmin Yang
Hector De Leon Represented By Jasmin Yang
Jeff Converse Pro Se
Michael Woods Pro Se
Michael McDermott Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Ellen O. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Plaintiff(s):
Steven M Speier Represented By Thomas J Eastmond Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:16-20260

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:17-01054 Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Inc. v. Lopez et al

#19.00 CONT Motion for Default Judgment From: 5/30/18, 7/25/18
Also #20 EH
Docket 46
Tentative Ruling:
5/30/18
BACKGROUND

On November 18, 2016, Javier & Carmen Lopez (collectively "Debtors"; individually, "Javier" and "Carmen") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On March 6, 2017, Amarillo College of Hairdressing ("Plaintiff") filed a non-dischargeability complaint against Javier pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4), and (a)(6). On July 12, 2017, the clerk entered default against Javier.

On October 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On November 7, 2017, Debtors filed their opposition. On November 13, 2017, the Court granted the motion, and, on December 11, 2017, Plaintiff amended its complaint to include Carmen as a defendant. On February 26, 2018, the clerk entered default against Carmen.

On April 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. According to Plaintiff,
2:00 PM
CONT...

Javier Lopez

Chapter 13
Javier, while employed as the Dean of Education at Plaintiff’s Palm Desert campus, received, through direct deposit, twice his agreed upon salary for a period of one year. Plaintiff asserts that the direct deposit authorization form contained a provision which granted Plaintiff the right to correct any erroneous overpayments of funds. After alerting Javier of the erroneous double payment, Javier refused to voluntarily reimburse Plaintiff for the overpayment. Plaintiff also asserts that Javier was aware of the erroneous double payment during the time when the double payments were made.

On January 2, 2014, Plaintiff filed a state court complaint against Javier for breach of contract, fraud, and conversion. On September 15, 2015, the state court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to all causes of action, and entered judgment in the amount of $49,603.08.

DISCUSSION
1. Entry of Default
  FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 55 states that "[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Local Rule 7055-1 provides further requirements relating to a motion for entry of default judgment, and those requirements have been substantially satisfied here.
2. Motion for Default Judgment
  1. Proper Service of Summons and Complaint
    
    FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004(b)(1) states, in part:
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Javier Lopez
    
    Chapter 13
    1. ervice may be made within the United States by first class mail postage prepaid as follows:
      1. Upon an individual other than an infant or incompetent, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual’s dwelling house or usual place of abode or to the place where the individual regularly conducts a business or profession.
        
        Here, Plaintiff served Debtors at the address listed on their bankruptcy schedules and served Debtor’s attorney via ECF. Therefore, service is proper.
  2. Merits of Plaintiff’s claim
Upon default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true. TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Almog v. Golden Summit Investors Group, Ltd., 2012 WL 12867972 at *4 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ("When reviewing a motion for default judgment, the Court must accept the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint relating to liability as true.").

Here, the complaint includes three causes of action, all related to non-dischargeability: (1) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A); (2) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4); and (3) 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)
1. The above provisions read, in pertinent part:
  1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –
2:00 PM
CONT...

Javier Lopez
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Javier Lopez Represented By
Christopher Hewitt
Defendant(s):
Javier Lopez Represented By
Christopher Hewitt
Carmen Lopez Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Carmen Lopez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Plaintiff(s):
Amarillo College of Hairdressing, Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Javier Lopez

Eamon Jafari

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01197 Itria Ventures, LLC v. Asif et al

#21.00 Order to Show Cause As To Why Defendants Should Not Be Held In Contempt For Violation Of Court Order To Respond To Discovery

EH

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By David T Egli
Zobia Asif Represented By
David T Egli
Joint Debtor(s):
Zobia Asif Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian
Plaintiff(s):
Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Thomas H Casey
2:00 PM
6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01146 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson

#22.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01146. Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua Cord Richardson. (A)(4), and (A)(6); and to Deny Discharge Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 727(A)(3), and (A)(5) (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)),(66 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims)) (Masud, Laila)

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori
Defendant(s):
Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori
Plaintiff(s):
Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By
D Edward Hays Laila Masud
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman
2:00 PM
6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#23.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Counterclaim [19] Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint to Determine Dischargeability Pursuant to 11
U.S.C. §523(a)(6) and COUNTERCLAIM of Shatara Adrienne Thompson for Defamation, Counterclaim by Robert Lee Thompson Jr, Shatara Adrienne Thompson against Beatriz M Gutierrez

From: 8/2/18 Also #24
EH

Docket 19

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Defendant(s):
Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl
Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl
Joint Debtor(s):
Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
2:00 PM
CONT...

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#24.00 CONT Status Conference on Complaint filed on 3/1/18 to Determine Dischargeability of Debt Pursuant to 11 USC 523(a)(6)

From: 5/3/18, 8/2/18 Also #23
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Defendant(s):
Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl
Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl
Joint Debtor(s):
Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Plaintiff(s):
Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-20229

Sean Phillip Coy

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01050 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certifica v. FMJM RWL III

#25.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01050. Complaint by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Certificate Trustee on Behalf of Bosco Credit II Trust Series 2010-1 against FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1.
Kristin)

From: 4/26/18, 5/10/18, 6/14/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 7/3/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sean Phillip Coy Represented By Caroline S Kim

Defendant(s):

FMJM RWL III Trust 2015-1 Represented By Neeru Jindal

Plaintiff(s):

Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By

Kristin A Zilberstein

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-12282

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01141 Balderas et al v. Valderrama

#26.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Also #27

Docket 3

Tentative Ruling:

8/29/18

BACKGROUND

On March 21, 2018, Frank Valderrama ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 2, 2018, Debtor received a discharge.

On June 25, 2018, Elizabeth Balderas & Jose Carrillo (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint against Debtor for non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2) (A).

On July 17, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On August 10, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their opposition.

DISCUSSION

2:00 PM

CONT...

Frank Javier Valderrama

MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD

Chapter 7

In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
MONEY JUDGMENT IN NON-DISCHARGEABILITY PROCEEDINGS

The Ninth Circuit has held that a bankruptcy court may enter a monetary judgment on a disputed state law fraud claim in the course of determining that the debt is nondischargeable. Cowen v. Kennedy (In re Kennedy), 108 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir.1997). Shawn Deitz v. Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford (In re Wayne Ford, Patricia Ford), 469
B.R. 11, 21 (9th Cir. BAP 2012), aff'd, 760 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2014). Nevertheless, in the complaint at issue here, Plaintiffs appear1 to have set forth only one cause of action: non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A). 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) alone is not a basis to enter a money judgment; the plain language of the statute provides that it is a basis for finding a debt to be non-dischargeable. If Plaintiffs seek a money judgment, they need to clearly delineate a non-bankruptcy law cause of action supporting that request.2 In order words, Plaintiffs need to identify their theory of a debt which exists under applicable state law. Without that showing, it is impossible to determine the applicable legal analysis.
NON-DISCHARGEABILITY STANDARD

As a preliminary note, the Court notes that while Plaintiffs’ opposition references § 523(a)(4), that subsection is not raised in the complaint and, therefore, any arguments regarding that subsection will not be addressed.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) states:
1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –

for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of creditor, to the extent obtained by –
1. false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;

The elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim are well-established: (a) the debtor made representations; (b) which were known to be false; (c) the representations were made with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (d) the creditor relied on such representations; (e) the creditor sustained loss and damage as a proximate result of the representations. See, e.g., In re Sabban, 600 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir. 2010).

As noted by Debtor, FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b) is applicable to a § 523(a)(2)(A) non- dischargeability proceeding. See, e.g., In re Kimmel, 2008 WL 5076380 at *1 (9th Cir. 2008). "In order to properly plead fraud with particularity, the complaint must allege the time, place, and content of the fraudulent representation such that a defendant can prepare an adequate response to the allegations." Id.

The Court agrees with Debtor that the complaint at issue here utterly fails to plead fraud with specificity. The complaint does not, at any point, identify a particular statement at a particular time, in a particular place. Nor is the complaint adequately detailed regarding the contents of the statements made. For example, section 14 of the complaint states: "Debtor intentionally mislead [sic] Plaintiffs by failing to disclose the truth regarding the Project." [Dkt. No. 1, pg. 8, lines 19-20]. This assertion simply does not contain the level of detail contemplated by FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b). This

2:00 PM

CONT...

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7

detail is all the more important when, as is the case here, Plaintiffs appear to be alleging a contract was formed in January 2007 and that Plaintiffs were still making payments to Debtor in December 2015. Here, the complaint paints a very unclear picture of the material facts.

The Court, on this record, declines to address Debtor’s argument that Plaintiff Elizabeth Balderas lacks standing to bring this claim because the operative complaint requires substantial amendment. The Court also notes that any request for a money judgment must contain a clear articulation of the non-bankruptcy legal basis for the underlying claim.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion and DISMISS the complaint without prejudice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Movant(s):

Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte

2:00 PM

CONT...

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Elizabeth Balderas Represented By John F Bazan

Jose Carrillo Represented By

John F Bazan

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-12282

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01141 Balderas et al v. Valderrama

#27.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01141. Complaint by Elizabeth Balderas, Jose Carrillo against Frank Javier Valderrama. 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)

Also #26 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Plaintiff(s):

Elizabeth Balderas Represented By John F Bazan

Jose Carrillo Represented By

John F Bazan

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-18792

Roman Negrete Manrriquez

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01093 Negrete Manrriquez v. BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE

#1.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Roman Negrete Manrriquez against BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION, its assignees

and/or successors, JP Morgan Chase Bank, SPS Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.. (Fee Not Required). (Attachments: # 1 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 1 # 2 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 2 (part 1) # 3 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 2 (part 2) # 4 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 2 (part 3) # 5 COMPLAINT - EXHIBIT 3) Nature of Suit:

72 - Injunctive relief - other, 91 - Declaratory judgment From: 6/28/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 7/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles

Defendant(s):

BEAR STEARNS RESIDENTIAL Pro Se

JP Morgan Chase Bank Pro Se

SPS Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. Represented By

Nancy L Lee

Plaintiff(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez Represented By Patricia A Mireles Timothy D Murphy

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Roman Negrete Manrriquez

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12949

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01153 Hutton v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al

#2.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Complaint Also #3

Docket 6

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lenton Hutton Represented By Christopher Hewitt Patricia Rodriguez

Defendant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

Lynette Gridiron-Winston

Clear Recon Corp. Pro Se

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se

Movant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

Lynette Gridiron-Winston

Plaintiff(s):

Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Patricia Rodriguez

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12949

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01153 Hutton v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al

#3.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01153. Notice of Removal by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. by Lenton T. Hutton. Lynette)

Also #2 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lenton Hutton Represented By Christopher Hewitt Patricia Rodriguez

Defendant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

Lynette Gridiron-Winston

Clear Recon Corp. Pro Se

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Patricia Rodriguez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-12149

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Motion to vacate dismissal From: 8/23/18

Also #5 EH

Docket 63

Tentative Ruling:

8/23/18

BACKGROUND

On March 18, 2017, Irma Cantu ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On June 15, 2018, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

Three days later, Trustee filed a motion to dismiss for failure to submit tax returns or refunds. Debtor did not file an opposition to the motion. After no appearance was made on behalf of Debtor at the motion to dismiss, the case was dismissed on July 25, 2018.

The day before the case was formally dismissed, Debtor filed a motion to vacate a dismissal order which did not yet exist. On July 25, 2018, Trustee filed comments indicating conditional approval of the motion.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13

DISCUSSION

Debtor relies on FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, which allows for relief from an order based on "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect."

The legal basis for Debtor’s assertion that the dismissal order should be vacated is that Debtor’s counsel inadvertently did not appear at the hearing due to an office error. It is well established, however, that "an attorney’s ignorance and carelessness does not provide grounds for Rule 60(b) relief." In re Mercado, 144 B.R. 879, 886 (Bankr.

C.D. Cal. 1992) (citing Bershad v. McDonough, 469 F.2d 1333, 1337 (7th Cir. 1972). And the mere assertion that counsel did not fulfill its duties, but that such carelessness was inadvertent, is clearly inadequate to support Rule 60(b) relief. See, e.g., In re ACME Motors, Inc., 125 B.R. 702, 703 (Bankr. D.R.I. 1991).

"Rule 60(b) relief is extraordinary." Id. Yet, in this court, a request for relief from a Chapter 13 dismissal order has become ordinary. On occasion, the requests are legally sound. Here, however, the evidence provided simply indicates that Debtor’s counsel did not attend the hearing for reasons that are unclear or unstated.

The Seventh Circuit has stated that:

he clients are principals, the attorney is an agent, and under the law of agency the principal is bound by his chosen agent’s deeds. The rule is that all of the attorney’s misconduct (except in the cases where the act is outside the scope of employment or in cases of excusable neglect) becomes the problem of the client. A lawyer who inexcusably neglects his client’s obligations does not present exceptional circumstances.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13

Bakery Mach. & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc., 570 F.3d 845, 848 (7th Cir. 2009). "Although attorney carelessness can [in certain circumstances] constitute ‘excusable neglect’ under Rule 60(b)(1), attorney inattentiveness to litigation is not excusable, no matter what the resulting consequences the attorney’s somnolent behavior may have on a litigant." Easley v. Kirmsee, 382 F.3d 693, 698 (7th Cir. 2004) (collecting cases).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion conditioned on compliance with the Trustee’s conditions.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens Leonard J Cravens

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-12149

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13 #5.00 Debtor's Motion for Order Disallowing Claim no 1-1 filed by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

From: 6/4/18 Also #4

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens

Movant(s):

Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens Leonard J Cravens

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-16699

Cindy Louise Lawson

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 50

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

The Debtor filed her case on August 10, 2017. The Debtor’s chapter 13 plan was confirmed on September 21, 2017. The Debtor became delinquent on her payments and a motion to dismiss was filed by the Trustee on June 19, 2018. Subsequently, the Debtor filed a Motion to Modify Plan on June 22, 2018. The Trustee filed comments recommending approval of the Motion.

The hearing on the Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss was continued for the Debtor to lodge an order and finalize the Motion to Modify. The Debtor asserts that an order on the Motion was lodged on July 26, 2018. No order was entered on the docket. The Debtor and her counsel failed to appear at the continued hearing on the Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss.

Based on the failure to lodge an order on the MMP and the failure to appear at the continued hearing, the Court dismissed the case.

The Debtor now seeks an order vacating the dismissal. In support the Debtor has provided a copy of the confirmation received on lodgment of the order and requests that the dismissal be vacated as resulting from a clerical error.

The Trustee responds that the Debtor has proffered no excuse for the nonappearance

11:00 AM

CONT...

Cindy Louise Lawson

Chapter 13

at the continued hearing on the Motion to Dismiss.

The docket reflects that the Debtor failed to comply with LBR 9013-1(o)(3) which requires the filing of a declaration of service and non-opposition for matter set on negative notice (such as the Debtor’s MMP). The Court’s internal records further reflect that the Court rejected the Debtor’s lodged order on 7/26/2018 at 11:19 a.m. An email notification of unused order was sent to the Debtor’s counsel at the CM/ECF email, rebecca@saunderslawoffice.com.

Notwithstanding these facts, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion provided that the Debtor can comply with the Trustee’s conditions. Additionally, as the record demonstrates that the case was dismissed as a result of counsel’s negligence, Debtor’s counsel shall not receive fees for the Motion to Vacate.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders

Movant(s):

Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-18762

Robin M. Lee and Catherine Y Christ

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

8/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robin M. Lee Represented By

Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Catherine Y Christ Represented By Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Robin M. Lee Represented By

Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Catherine Y Christ Represented By Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13 #8.00 CONT Motion of U.S. Trustee for the Entry of an Order Requiring Nationstar Mortgage LLC to Provide an Escrow Account Reconciliation Statement & Related Relief

From: 6/28/18 EH

Docket 113

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/8/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson

Joint Debtor(s):

Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-10189

Belen L. Rubio

Chapter 13 #9.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 8-1 filed by LVNV Funding, LLC EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:

08/30/18

BACKGROUND:

On January 10, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Belen Rubio ("Debtor") filed for chapter 13 relief. On July 30, 2018, Debtor filed Objection to Claim # 8 (the "Objection") of LVNV Funding, LLC ("Claimant"). Service was proper and no opposition or response has been filed.

OBJECTION:

Debtor’s sole objection is that LVNV has not demonstrated sufficient evidence of its standing to seek payment on the claim.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby

11:00 AM

CONT...

Belen L. Rubio

Chapter 13

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

The Debtor asserts that LVNV’s claim must fail because there is insufficient evidence of the original assignment from WebBank to Prosper Marketplace Inc., and subsequently to LVNV. Here, the Debtor’s schedules provide evidence in support of Prosper’s claim because the Debtor’s listed Prosper in their Schedules and the date the account was opened corroborates the facts in the filed Proof of Claim. Based on these facts, the Debtor’s Objection fails to negate the allegation of the Claim that WebBank transferred the claim to Prosper. As to the transfer from Prosper to LVNV, the Claim provides documentation signed under penalty of perjury that Prosper transferred its Claim to LVNV.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Debtor’s

11:00 AM

CONT...

Belen L. Rubio

Chapter 13

Objection.

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-17859

Juan Aguilera

Chapter 13 #13.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 73

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Aguilera Represented By A Mina Tran

Movant(s):

Juan Aguilera Represented By A Mina Tran

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12986

James Owen Hall, Jr and Jodie Beryl Hall

Chapter 13 #14.00 Motion to Disallow Claims number 14 EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

08/30/18

BACKGROUND:

On April 11, 2018 ("Petition Date"), James and Jodie Hall (collectively, the "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 13 bankruptcy.

On July 13, 2018 the Debtors filed an Objection to Claim No. 14 (the "Objection") of LVNV Funding, LLC ("Claimant"). Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

OBJECTION:

The Debtors object to the claim on the grounds that it is barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP

11:00 AM

CONT...

James Owen Hall, Jr and Jodie Beryl Hall

Chapter 13

9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Rebuttal of the Prima Facie Proof of Claim

In this case, the Debtors assert that the Claim should be disallowed as time barred.

Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. The statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal.

App. 2004).

11:00 AM

CONT...

James Owen Hall, Jr and Jodie Beryl Hall

Chapter 13

Here, the Debtors assert that Claimant’s documentation indicates a last transaction between the Debtor and original creditor took place on February 15, 2018, and that the Claimant charged off the account on October 31, 2008. Based on these facts, the Debtors have established that over four years have already lapsed since the last item in the account. Thus, the burden to show the validity of Claim No. 14 must shift to Claimant. Claimant, however, though properly served, has failed to respond, which may be deemed as consent to the relief requested under LBR 9013-1(h). Thus, as the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the Claimant, the Objection must be sustained.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Objection is SUSTAINED. Claim #14 is disallowed in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James Owen Hall Jr Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Jodie Beryl Hall Represented By Dana Travis

Movant(s):

James Owen Hall Jr Represented By Dana Travis Dana Travis

Jodie Beryl Hall Represented By Dana Travis

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

James Owen Hall, Jr and Jodie Beryl Hall

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 7 #15.00 CONT Motion for Setting Property Value From: 8/2/18

Also #16 EH

Docket 48

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 8/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/18

BACKGROUND

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 7

Debtor’s assertion of value.

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to file and serve notice of the continuance, a copy of the Motion, and supplemental documentation per the Court’s instructions.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Movant(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 7 #16.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 6/14/18, 6/28/18, 8/2/18

Also #15 EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 8/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16237

Miguel Santa Maria and Lilia Maldonado

Chapter 13 #17.00 Motion to Avoid Junior Lien with SRP 2013-9 Funding Trust c/o SN Servicing Corporation

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15098

Fatana Aziz

Chapter 13 #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fatana Aziz Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15108

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 13 #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Philip Salazar Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15129

Victoria A Idzardi

Chapter 7 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 7/26/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Victoria A Idzardi Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15131

Arcy B Gonzales and Margarita B Gonzales

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Peter Ruiz Represented By

Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15236

David Meisland

Chapter 13 #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

David Meisland Represented By Luke Jackson Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15239

Amanda E Curry and Matthew L Curry

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Amanda E Curry Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Joint Debtor(s):

Matthew L Curry Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15249

Gregory W. Thomas

Chapter 7 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 7/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas E Klein

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15446

Gilberto Oliden and Irma Maria Oliden

Chapter 13 #43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gilberto Oliden Represented By Lauren M Foley

Joint Debtor(s):

Irma Maria Oliden Represented By Lauren M Foley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15459

Victor H Saravia and Deborah A Saravia

Chapter 13 #44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Victor H Saravia Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Alejandro Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Joint Debtor(s):

Karla Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15026

Joe R Garcia

Chapter 13 #48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joe R Garcia Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:12-35447

Fernando Rodriguez and Gabriela Rodriguez

Chapter 13 #49.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 282

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Fernando Rodriguez Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Joe Martinez Jr. Represented By David Lozano

Joint Debtor(s):

Sandra Lynette Martinez Represented By David Lozano

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-22294

Jonathan William Nicastro

Chapter 13 #53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 125

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jonathan William Nicastro Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-11780

Laurie L Burns

Chapter 13 #54.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Laurie L Burns Represented By Javier H Castillo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-11873

Juan Figueroa and Nancy Figueroa

Chapter 13 #55.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Figueroa Represented By

8/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Rene Fullen Jr. Represented By Luis G Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-16263

Tanyua A Gates-Holmes

Chapter 13 #59.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/2/18

Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Tanyua A Gates-Holmes Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18430

Isaias Melo and Rosa Melo

Chapter 13 #60.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Isaias Melo Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosa Melo Represented By

Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-19890

Rick Gaeta Carreon

Chapter 13 #61.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 88

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/16/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rick Gaeta Carreon Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-21234

Frank A Horzen and Barbara A Horzen

Chapter 13 #62.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 93

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose R. Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Joint Debtor(s):

Miriam L Castaneda Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-13982

Clarice Morris

Chapter 13 #66.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Also #67

Docket 61

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Clarice Morris Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-13982

Clarice Morris

Chapter 13 #67.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Also #66 EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Clarice Morris Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14075

Stephanie Lobato

Chapter 13 #68.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 23

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Stephanie Lobato Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14790

Ernesto Ayon Lopez and Dolores Millan Sanchez

Chapter 13 #69.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 42

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernesto Ayon Lopez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Joint Debtor(s):

Dolores Millan Sanchez Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-15475

Shane Morgan

Chapter 7 #70.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 8/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Roberto Garcia Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Martha Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-19132

Juan A Martinez

Chapter 13 #78.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-19589

Rodrigo Fernando Ramirez Guinea

Chapter 13 #79.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rodrigo Fernando Ramirez Guinea Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20177

Randal Scott Oakley and Christine Ann Oakley

Chapter 13 #80.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 39

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Randal Scott Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston

Joint Debtor(s):

Christine Ann Oakley Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10209

Ertun Reshat and Hale Reshat

Chapter 13 #81.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ertun Reshat Represented By

April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Hale Reshat Represented By

April E Roberts

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10414

Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda

Chapter 13 #82.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Leonel Villa Represented By

Debtor(s):

Jason Allen Colleasure Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Julia Ann Colleasure Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Friday, August 31, 2018

Hearing Room

303

10:00 AM

6:14-16994

Yolanda Llamas

Chapter 13 #1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1345 West F Street, Ontario, CA 91762

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK

From: 6/26/18 EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: ADVANCED HEARING TO 8/1/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Yolanda Llamas Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:14-18977

Greenwood T. May and Judy G. May

Chapter 13 #1.00 Motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 168 Amber Way Perris, CA 92571

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 94

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Greenwood T. May Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Judy G. May Represented By

Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank NA, successor trustee to Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Greenwood T. May and Judy G. May

Kristin A Zilberstein Merdaud Jafarnia Nancy L Lee

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-19787

Gloria Hayslet

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Nissan Versa Note

MOVANT: QUANTUM3 GROUP LLC

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gloria Hayslet Represented By Nancy Korompis

Movant(s):

Quantum3 Group LLC as agent for Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-20659

Coralia Beltran Rivas

Chapter 13 #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Toyota Corolla

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from stay under § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown.

GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Coralia Beltran Rivas Represented By Stephen L Burton

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12485

Robert Thomas Gonzales

Chapter 7 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 24295 Brodiaea Avenue, Moreno Valley, CA 92553

MOVANT: WILMINGTON TRUST NA

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Debtor had a previous bankruptcy filing dismissed on July 3, 2017. The instant case was filed on March 27, 2018. Therefore, by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A), the automatic stay in the instant case expired on April 26, 2018. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONFIRM that the automatic stay is not in effect and DENY the remaining requests for relief which are not in rem requests as moot.

The Court is to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)

(4) based on multiple bankruptcy filings affecting the property. Specifically, the Court notes that Debtor filed five skeletal bankruptcy petitions since 2010 which were all summarily dismissed. The Court is inclined to GRANT the request under ¶ 9 upon recording of a copy of this order or giving appropriate notice of its entry in compliance with applicable nonbankruptcy law.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Thomas Gonzales Represented By Brad Weil

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Robert Thomas Gonzales

Chapter 7

WILMINGTON TRUST, NA, Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1156 Sheila Court, Upland, CA 91784

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12782

Justa Nelida Guzman

Chapter 13 #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3527 N. Bronson St. San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/2/18 AT 10:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Justa Nelida Guzman Represented By Lionel E Giron

Movant(s):

The Bank of New York Mellon, et al Represented By

S Renee Sawyer Blume

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14283

Jennifer A. Lawton

Chapter 7 #7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 32081, Rosemary St, Winchester, CA 92596

MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES LLC

From: 8/21/18 EH

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jennifer A. Lawton Represented By Steven E Cowen

Movant(s):

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC Represented By Kelsey X Luu Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15098

Fatana Aziz

Chapter 13 #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 10340 Zion Dr, Fairfax, VA 22032

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

CASE DISMISSED 8/29/18

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Due to Debtor’s previous bankruptcy filing (case no. 17-17927), pursuant to 11

U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A) the automatic stay in the instant case expired on July 12, 2018. Therefore, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request under ¶ 3, conforming that the automatic stay is not in effect. The Court is inclined to GRANT waiver of the Rule 4001(a) stay and GRANT relief from the § 1301(a) stay. Based on the fact that the automatic stay is no longer in effect, both because of the operation of § 362(c)(3)(A) and because the case was dismissed on August 29, 2018, the Court is inclined to DENY as moot all remaining requests for relief which are not in rem requests.

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(d)(4) based on multiple recent skeletal filings affecting the property. GRANT request for relief under ¶ 10. DENY requests for relief under ¶¶ 8 and 11 for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

10:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Fatana Aziz

Chapter 13

Fatana Aziz Pro Se

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15334

David Leo Carroll and Lisa Kay Carroll

Chapter 7 #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Toyota Camry

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Leo Carroll Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Kay Carroll Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By

Austin P Nagel

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

David Leo Carroll and Lisa Kay Carroll

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15583

Shannon Martha Wisniewski

Chapter 7 #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ford Fusion, VIN 3FA6P0H71GR329121

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Shannon Martha Wisniewski Represented By Daniel King

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16328

Guillermo Villalpando

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 HONDA ACCORD, VIN: 1HGC R2F5 0FA0 91678

MOVANT: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Guillermo Villalpando Represented By Francis Guilardi

Movant(s):

AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE Represented By

Vincent V Frounjian

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16356

Kenneth Ronald Wolf and Carol Janet Wolf

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Wildcat 5th Wheel Travel Trailer

MOVANT: BANK OF THE WEST

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kenneth Ronald Wolf Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Carol Janet Wolf Represented By Dana Travis

Movant(s):

BANK OF THE WEST Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Kenneth Ronald Wolf and Carol Janet Wolf

Mary Ellmann Tang

Chapter 7

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16662

Mark H Chappell

Chapter 13 #13.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14713 Valleyheart Drive, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

MOVANT: AKSELROD BYPASS TRUST, ALEX AKSELROD, TRUSTEE

CASE DISMISSED 8/27/18

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Because this case was dismissed on August 27, 2018, the Court is inclined to DENY as moot all requests for relief which are not in rem requests.

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

based on an unauthorized transfer of a partial interest in property around the petition date, and based on the fact that this was a skeletal bankruptcy filing. GRANT relief from Rule 4001(a) stay.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark H Chappell Pro Se
Movant(s):
Akselrod Bypass Trust, Alex Represented By Yevgeniya Lisitsa
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Mark H Chappell

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#14.00 Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint Against Chapter 7 Trustee EH
Docket 14
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Defendant(s):
Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Movant(s):
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Plaintiff(s):
Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
CONT...

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

#15.00 Motion to Extend Deadline to File Schedules or Provide Required Information, and/or Plan (Case Opening Documents)

Also #16 EH
Docket 49
Tentative Ruling:
9/4/2018
BACKGROUND

On March 7, 2018, Rick’s Patio Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On May 5, 2018, the Court approved the application to employ Rosenstein & Associates as counsel.

At the original case management conference on April 24, 2018, the Court adopted the proposed deadline of July 30, 2018, for the filing of a disclosure statement and plan of reorganization. The case management conference was continued to July 31, 2018, the first date after the proposed deadlines. Debtor did not comply with the deadlines, and did not file the scheduling order prior to the continued case management conference.

On August 3, 2018, the scheduling order was entered, setting a deadline of July 30, 2018, to file and serve the disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan. On August 10, 2018, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan, as well as a motion to extend time to file disclosure statement and plan.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

DISCUSSION

Debtor asserts that "[a] close analogy to the current situation can be found in the exclusive period allowed for chapter 11 debtors to file their own plans, a period which courts may extend or reduce for cause." [Dkt. No. 49, pg. 4, lines 22-25]. Debtor then recites a list of factors it argues the Court should consider when weighing the motion.

The Court declines to adopt Debtor’s proposed "for cause" standard because it is incompatible with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9006(b)(1) states:

Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subdivision, when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified period by these rules or by a notice given thereunder or by order of court, the court for cause shown may at any time in its discretion (1) with or without motion or notice order the period enlarged if the request therefor is made before the expiration of the period originally prescribed or as extended by a previous order or (2) on motion made after the expiration of the specified period permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.

Therefore, FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9006(b)(1) imposes a for cause standard when the request for extension is made before the deadline has passed, and an excusable neglect standard when the request is made after the fact. Here, Debtor filed the motion for extension eleven days after the deadline has passed. Therefore, Debtor has recited the incorrect legal standard. Debtor has not attempted to argue or meet the excusable neglect standard and, as a result, the standard has not been met.

TENTATIVE RULING
2:00 PM
CONT...

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion without prejudice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein
Movant(s):
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
2:00 PM
6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

#16.00 Motion to Extend Time to have Plan of Reorganization Confirmed Also #15
EH

Docket 50

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein
Movant(s):
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein
11:00 AM
6:18-14609

Lorena Mora Huante

Chapter 7

#1.00 Motion to set aside RE: dismissal EH
Docket 12
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lorena Mora Huante Pro Se
Movant(s):
Lorena Mora Huante Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Chapter 7

#2.00 CONT Chapter 7 Trustee's Motion for Order Compelling Turnover of Real Property of the Estate

From: 8/29/18 EH
Docket 86
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.

#3.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment

From: 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 4/11/18, 6/13/18, 8/22/18, 8/29/18

EH

Docket 29
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Defendant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Plaintiff(s):
Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01102 PRINGLE v. Capital One Bank (USA), National Association

#4.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01102. Complaint by JOHN PRINGLE against Capital One Bank (USA), National Association. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for: (1) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11
U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05; (2) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B); (3) Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; and (4) Disallowance of Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502 Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

EH

Docket 1
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/7/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
Defendant(s):
Capital One Bank (USA), National Represented By
Kevin M Eckhardt
Plaintiff(s):
JOHN PRINGLE Represented By Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:18-12440

Paul Pound

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01147 Lloyd v. Pound

#5.00 Status Conference RE: Complaint by April Lloyd against Paul M Pound. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

EH

Docket 1
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Paul Pound Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Paul M Pound Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
April Lloyd Represented By
Chane Buck
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-12920

Jeffrey W Paradis

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01150 Discover Bank v. Paradis

#6.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01150. Complaint by Discover Bank against Jeffrey W Paradis.

EH

Docket 1
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jeffrey W Paradis Represented By Daniel King
Defendant(s):
Jeffrey W Paradis Represented By Daniel King
Plaintiff(s):
Discover Bank Represented By Holly J Nolan
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-13012
Issa M Musharbash
Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al
#7.00 Amended Motion for Order to Strike Joint Answer of Defendants for Willful Failure to Comply with the Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(a) and Court's Order of June 13, 2018; and for Sanctions
Also #8 EH
Docket 65
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Defendant(s):
Issa M Musharbash Pro Se
Amal Musharbash Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-13012

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al

#8.00 CONT Status conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01138. Complaint to Determine Non-Dischargeability of Debt by Phillip Musharbash , Violette Musharbash against Issa M Musharbbash , Amal Musharbbash

From: 9/20/17, 2/7/18, 3/7/18, 8/15/18 Also #7
EH

Docket 1
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Defendant(s):
Issa M Musharbash Pro Se
Amal Musharbash Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Plaintiff(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-17344

John Ryan

Chapter 13

#9.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Confirming Termination of Stay under 11 U.S.C. 362(j) or That No Stay is in Effect 67800 Vista Chino Ste 101 Cathedral City CA 92234

Docket 4
Party Information
Debtor(s):
John Ryan Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:13-28117

Manuel Sandoval Gonzalez and Andrea Michelle Gonzalez

Chapter 13

#1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 425 Jenny Circle, Corona, CA 92882

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

EH

Docket 90
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
9/11/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and GRANT order designating Debtor as "borrower" under Cal. Civil Code § 2920.5. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Manuel Sandoval Gonzalez Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Andrea Michelle Gonzalez Represented By Dana Travis
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Manuel Sandoval Gonzalez and Andrea Michelle Gonzalez

Chapter 13
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
Angie M Marth Kelsey X Luu
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-20186

Donald John Hanson and Mary Merzella Hanson

Chapter 13

#2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Toyota Tacoma, VIN: 5TFJU4GN4EX057009

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC

EH

Docket 52
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Donald John Hanson Represented By Manfred Schroer
Joint Debtor(s):
Mary Merzella Hanson Represented By Manfred Schroer
Movant(s):
AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Donald John Hanson and Mary Merzella Hanson
Jennifer H Wang

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-13923

Suzanne Berry

Chapter 13

#3.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11242 Sweetwater Dr.
Riverside, California 92505

MOVANT: CHAMPION MORTGAGE COMPANY (NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, DBA)

From: 6/26/18, 7/31/18 EH
Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
6/26/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Suzanne Berry Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
Champion Mortgage Company Represented By Ashlee Fogle Sean C Ferry
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Suzanne Berry

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-14908

Joan Eleanor Demiany

Chapter 13

#4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1055 East Via Colusa, Palm Springs, CA 92262

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

EH

Docket 35
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joan Eleanor Demiany Represented By Jenny L Doling
Movant(s):
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 22424 Tanager Street, Grand Terrace, CA 92313

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

From: 6/6/18 EH
Docket 59
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for relief from the co-debtor stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and GRANT order designating Debtor as "borrower" under Cal. Civil Code § 2920.5. DENY request pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown and DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark Gehrig Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
Sean C Ferry
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-17402

Thomas Lee Abercrombie and Rebecca Anne Abercrombie

Chapter 13

#6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Ford Escape; VIN: 1FMCU0H93DUD72995

MOVANT: ALTA VISTA CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Joint Debtor(s):
Rebecca Anne Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Movant(s):
Alta Vista Credit Union Represented By
Bruce P. Needleman
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-13172

Michelle Cadena Quinn

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3656 N. Valley Court, San Bernardino, CA 92407

MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

From: 6/13/18, 8/28/18 EH
Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert
Movant(s):
Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14725

Percylyn Agustin Basa

Chapter 13

#8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14623 Meadowsweet Drive, Eastvale, CA 92880

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

EH

Docket 27
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Percylyn Agustin Basa Represented By Benjamin R Heston
Movant(s):
Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By
Angie M Marth
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15150

Gary Valbuena

Chapter 7

#9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 5040 Breckenridge Ave, Banning CA 92220

MOVANT: FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 10
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

The Debtor asserts he received insufficient notice. Specifically, he asserts he first knew about the Motion for relief from stay on 8/22/2018 when the Movant’s counsel informed the Superior Court in the UD Action that a hearing would be happening on September 11, 2018. Debtor asserts he was denied a copy of the Motion when he requested it from the Movant but that he since obtained a copy of the Motion from the clerk’s office on 8/24/18.

As to notice and service of the Motion, the Court’s procedures permit Motions for Relief From Stay to pursue Residential Unlawful Detainer actions to be served not later than 5 court days prior to the date of the hearing with telephonic notice. Here, the Debtor admits that he had actual notice and a copy of the Motion more than 5 court days before the hearing. For these reasons, the Court finds that notice and service were sufficient under the circumstances. Moreover, the Mailbox rule and Movant’s proof of service support that the Debtor was served.

The Debtor goes on to assert that the Movant is not the "Legal Title Owner" and/or that Movant has not complied with California law in foreclosing.
10:00 AM
CONT...

Gary Valbuena

Chapter 7
As a threshold matter, a motion for stay relief is a summary proceeding. In re Santa Clara County Fair Ass'n, Inc., 180 B.R. 564 (9th Cir.BAP (Cal.) 1995) (citing In re Computer Communications, Inc., 824 F.2d 725, 729 (9th Cir.1987)). In a summary proceeding, the court's discretion is broad. Courts may consider the factor of judicial economy when deciding lift stay issues. Id.

The only triable issues in a Motion for Relief from Stay are (1) lack of adequate protection; (2) the debtor's equity in the property; and (3) the necessity of the property to an effective reorganization of the debtor, or (4) the existence of other cause for relief from the stay. In re Computer Communications, Inc., 824 F.2d 725, 729.

Here, the issues and defenses surrounding the validity of the underlying foreclosure do not directly relate to the lifting of the stay, and accordingly they are not issues that are before the bankruptcy court. The irregularities raised by the Debtor are more properly considered by a state court in the determination of an unlawful detainer action. For purposes of the bankruptcy court’s summary consideration of the Motion, the Court finds that the Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale presented by Movant is adequate to confer standing to Movant and establish that a "colorable claim" exists, and the Debtor, for his part, has not provided any cognizable evidence or argument that the Property holds any value that would be beneficial to the estate or its creditors. Tellingly, the Chapter 7 trustee has filed no opposition to the Motion despite having received regular notice and an opportunity to file opposition.

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the Movant has established cause for relief from the automatic stay to pursue its Unlawful Detainer action in State Court and the Debtor is free to pursue any and all defenses available to him under state law in that action.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gary Valbuena Pro Se
Movant(s):
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Gary Valbuena

Agop G Arakelian

Chapter 7
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15435

Derek Lansdale and Kimberly Diane Lansdale

Chapter 7

#10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Cruze, VIN: 1G1PB5SG1G7189932

MOVANT: ACAR LEASING LTD

EH

Docket 8
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Derek Lansdale Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Kimberly Diane Lansdale Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
ACAR Leasing LTD d/b/a GM Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Derek Lansdale and Kimberly Diane Lansdale
Sheryl K Ith

Chapter 7
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15710

Francisco Parra

Chapter 7

#11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: N 2017 NISSAN SENTRA

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

EH

Docket 12
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING
09/11/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Francisco Parra Represented By
Jessica De Anda Leon
Movant(s):
Bank of America, N.A. Represented By Megan E Lees
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15900

Adrio Soedarmo and Yolanda Soedarmo

Chapter 13

#12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Toyota Scion IM

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 16
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Adrio Soedarmo Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Joint Debtor(s):
Yolanda Soedarmo Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Austin P Nagel
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Adrio Soedarmo and Yolanda Soedarmo

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15909

Michael James Watts

Chapter 13

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Avalon

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 15
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request as to § 362(d)(1) for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael James Watts Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15911

Rogelio Hernandez Delgado

Chapter 7

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Mercedes Benz C Class

MOVANT: WESCOM CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 10
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rogelio Hernandez Delgado Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Movant(s):
Wescom Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16081

Rachael Dene Thomas

Chapter 7

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Chrysler 200 VIn 1C3CCBB9DN763064

MOVANT: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 15
Tentative Ruling:
Tentative Ruling 09/11/18
The Movant failed to check either box 6 or 7 indicating to the Debtor the timeline for response to the Motion. Additionally, the Movant did not check the basis for relief (i.e. (d)(1) or (d)(2) in the prayer for relief).

The primary issue, however, is that the Debtor filed a change of address on the Court’s docket on August 17, 2018, only 3 days following the filing of the Motion. Based on the timing of the Debtor’s change of address and in order to ensure due process, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion without prejudice.
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rachael Dene Thomas Pro Se
Movant(s):
SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Represented By
Paul V Reza
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16701

James Ralph Albano

Chapter 7

#16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 36651 Indian Knoll Road,Temecula, CA 92592

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 9
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT pursuant to ¶¶ 3 and 12 of prayer for relief. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Ralph Albano Represented By Derik N Lewis
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association, as Represented By
Angie M Marth
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
CONT...

James Ralph Albano

Chapter 7
10:00 AM
6:18-16815

Javier Ortega

Chapter 13

#17.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 4408 Tarzon Street, Los Angeles, CA 90063

MOVANT: JAVIER ORTEGA

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
09/11/18

The Debtor’s evidence establishes that the dismissal of the prior case is excusable and that the instant case was not filed in bad faith. However, the Debtor asserts he is seeking to avoid foreclosure and failed to serve the secured lender on his residence via FRBP 7004(h).

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Javier Ortega Represented By
Alon Darvish
Movant(s):
Javier Ortega Represented By
Alon Darvish Alon Darvish
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16932

Olivia Lopez

Chapter 13

#18.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 31160 Fretwell, Homeland CA 92548

MOVANT: OLIVIA LOPEZ

EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:
TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18

The Debtor has explained that the prior dismissal for failure to submit tax returns was due to a misunderstanding on the part of the Debtor regarding her obligation to file returns. However, there is no indication whether the Debtor has now remedied and filed her 2017 return. Additionally, the Debtor’s Notice and Motion identify Troia Realty LLC as the primary party entitled to notice of the Motion. However, the proof of service fails to indicate that Troia Realty LLC was served.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Olivia Lopez Represented By
William Radcliffe
Movant(s):
Olivia Lopez Represented By
William Radcliffe William Radcliffe
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Olivia Lopez

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16996

Gabriel Cruz

Chapter 13

#19.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 2012 Ford Edge, 2004 Ford Excursion

MOVANT: GABRIEL CRUZ

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
09/11/2018

Service of the Motion was proper. The Debtor has demonstrated that his prior case was dismissed for failure to make plan payments after the Debtor lost his employment. The Debtor has provided evidence that he is has new employment and is able to propose a chapter 13 plan in good faith. Based on these facts, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gabriel Cruz Represented By
Christopher J Langley
Movant(s):
Gabriel Cruz Represented By
Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-10155

Jose De Jesus Hernandez

Chapter 11

#20.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3095 Ocelot Circle, Corona, CA 92882

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

From: 7/24/18, 8/21/18 EH
Docket 71
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 8/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
7/24/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶ 2,3, and 12.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By
Eric Bensamochan
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Austin P Nagel
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#21.00 Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement Also #22
EH

Docket 45
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#22.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 5/8/18, 8/21/18 Also #21
EH

Docket 18
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 9/25/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
10:00 AM
6:18-14044

Boyd Eugene Givens

Chapter 7

#1.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation re 12 Nissan Maxima

EH

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Boyd Eugene Givens Pro Se
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14061

Jennifer Monique Devore-Garcia

Chapter 7

#2.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and American Honda Finance Corporation re 2017 Honda Civic

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jennifer Monique Devore-Garcia Represented By
Daniel King
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15553

Lance Davis and Cesar Castaneda

Chapter 7

#3.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Ally Bank re 2014 Buick Encore

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Lance Davis Represented By
Terrence Fantauzzi
Joint Debtor(s):
Cesar Castaneda Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15553

Lance Davis and Cesar Castaneda

Chapter 7

#4.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Bank of the West re 2016 Mazda CX5 2WD

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Lance Davis Represented By
Terrence Fantauzzi
Joint Debtor(s):
Cesar Castaneda Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15767

Reva Mae Scott

Chapter 7

#5.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA LLC re 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350W

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Reva Mae Scott Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16129

An Quoc To

Chapter 7

#6.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Toyota Motor Credit Corporation re 2017 Lexus

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
An Quoc To Represented By
Rex Tran
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:13-23186

Richard C Cox, Jr

Chapter 7

#7.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Insurance Renewal Commissions From: 8/22/18
EH

Docket 150

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard C Cox Jr Represented By Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
11:00 AM
6:14-18549

Matthew Joseph Pautz and Alice Louise Pautz

Chapter 7

#8.00 CONT Order to Show Cause re Bodily Detention Order

From: 8/15/17, 9/18/17, 10/18/17, 11/13/17, 11/27/17,1/18/18, 3/21/18

EH

Docket 135
Tentative Ruling:
Based on the Chapter 7 Trustee's Notice and Request that Order of Civil Contempt be Vacated and Discharged, the Court is inclined to DISCHARGE the OSC and this matter off calendar.
APPEARANCES WAIVED.
Debtor(s):
Party Information
Matthew Joseph Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Joint Debtor(s):
Alice Louise Pautz Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe Samuel J Romero
11:00 AM
6:16-11086
Bernard Joseph O'Kelly
Chapter 7
#9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 82

Tentative Ruling:
9/12/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for the Trustee, and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 564.72 Trustee Expenses: $ 197.88

Attorney Fees: $ 6,134.90 Attorney Costs: $ 804.69

Accountant Fees: $ 1,630.50 Accountant Expenses: $245.80

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Bernard Joseph O'Kelly Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Bernard Joseph O'Kelly

Chapter 7
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01156 Daff v. Fabrigas, Jr.

#10.00 CONT Motion for Order Vacating Default Judgment

From: 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 4/11/18, 6/13/18, 8/22/18, 8/29/18, 9/5/18

EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Defendant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Fernando Fabrigas, Jr. Represented By Kevin Tang
Plaintiff(s):
Charles W. Daff Represented By Brandon J Iskander
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr.

Chapter 7
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Chapter 7

#11.00 CONT Chapter 7 Trustee's Motion for Order Compelling Turnover of Real Property of the Estate

From: 8/29/18, 9/5/18 EH
Docket 86

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By
R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang
Movant(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander Rika Kido
11:00 AM
6:18-13783

Bon Vyrak Chea and Somaly Leca Chea

Chapter 7

#12.00 Motion to Dismiss Case Pursuant to 11 USC Sections 707(b)(1), (b)(2) & (b)(3) and Contingent Motion to Extend the Discharge Deadline Pursuant to FRBP Procedure 4004 & 1017

EH

Docket 16

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Bon Vyrak Chea Represented By Chris A Mullen
Joint Debtor(s):
Somaly Leca Chea Represented By Chris A Mullen
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01105. Complaint by Joana Johnson against Vance Zachary Johnson, Goe & Forsythe, LLP. (61 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(5), domestic support)) (Talkov, Scott)

From: 7/10/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Defendant(s):
Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Plaintiff(s):
Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
6:18-11717

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01132 Marquez v. Amini

#14.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding For Failure To State A Claim EH
Docket 9
Tentative Ruling:
9/12/18
BACKGROUND

On March 5, 2018, Jordan Amini ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition.

On June 11, 2018, Gustavo Marquez ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Debtor for non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(6).

On August 22, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On August 30, 2018, Plaintiff filed its opposition.

DISCUSSION
1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Jordan Halston Amini
  
  Chapter 7
  In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
2. NON-DISCHARGEABILITY STANDARD
  
  As a preliminary note, the Court notes that Debtor’s motion to dismiss was not served at all. The Court also notes that the proof of service for Plaintiff’s opposition to motion to dismiss was in an incorrect pdf format, yet Plaintiff did not remedy the deficiency after receiving a notice to filer.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(6) state:
  1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –
    1. for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of creditor, to the extent obtained by –
      1. false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;

(6) for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity;

The elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim are well-established: (a) the debtor made

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7

representations; (b) which were known to be false; (c) the representations were made with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (d) the creditor relied on such representations; (e) the creditor sustained loss and damage as a proximate result of the representations. See, e.g., In re Sabban, 600 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir. 2010).

As implicitly noted by Debtor, FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b) is applicable to a § 523(a)(2)

(A) non-dischargeability proceeding. See, e.g., In re Kimmel, 2008 WL 5076380 at *1 (9th Cir. 2008). "In order to properly plead fraud with particularity, the complaint must allege the time, place, and content of the fraudulent representation such that a defendant can prepare an adequate response to the allegations." Id.

The Court disagrees with Debtor that the complaint at issue fails to plead a cause of action pursuant to § 523(a)(2)(A) with sufficient particularity. While the general allegations section of the complaint only contains general recitations of a misleading scheme that do not have any particular relationship to Plaintiff, Plaintiff has incorporated the state court complaint by reference. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the state court complaint contain a detailed description of the allegedly false or fraudulent statements made by Debtor1, and ¶¶ 18-22 of the state court complaint sufficiently allege the elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim.2

To prevail on a claim under § 523(a)(6), a creditor must demonstrate three elements:

(1) willful conduct; (2) malice; and (3) causation. See In re Butcher, 200 B.R. 675, 680 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1996) (quoting In re Apte, 180 B.R. 223, 230 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1995)). A willful injury is a "deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57, 61 (1998). "A malicious injury involves (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse." In re Barboza, 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting In re Jercich, 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir. 2001)).

Here, Debtor has not raised a coherent legal argument with respect to the claim for relief pursuant to § 523(a)(6), although the Court surmises that Debtor generally disagrees with the allegations. Nevertheless, it is unclear what or which elements of a

§ 523(a)(6) cause of action Debtor believes have not been satisfied here; a review of the state court complaint reveals allegations which are adequate to allege each of the above recited elements. Specifically, Plaintiff has alleged a deliberate or intentional

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jordan Halston Amini

Chapter 7

wrongful act which necessarily produced harm without just cause or excuse.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se

Movant(s):

Jordan Halston Amini Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Gustavo Marquez Represented By Curtis M King

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01127 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC et al

#1.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding filed by Defendants Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP; Les Zieve; John Steele; and Janaya Carter

From: 8/23/18 EH

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER DISMISSING ADVERSARY FILED 8/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

FNF Servicing Inc Pro Se

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs

LoanCare, LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Melanie Tarhuni

Jennifer Needs

Chapter 13

Les Zieve Represented By

Jennifer Needs

John Steele Represented By

Jennifer Needs Jennifer Needs

Janaya Carter Represented By

Jennifer Needs Jennifer Needs

Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP Represented By Jennifer Needs

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-15520

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 8/30/18 EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-14476

Juan Rene Fullen, Jr.

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Motion to Authorize Loan Modification (LMM) Agreement and Modify Loan on Real Property (LBR 9013-1 (o) )

From: 7/19/18, 8/23/18 EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Rene Fullen Jr. Represented By Luis G Torres

Movant(s):

Nationstar Mortgage LLC Represented By Brandye N Foreman Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #4.00 Motion to vacate and set aside for fraud order and dismissal arising from motion to dismiss chapter 13

Docket 166

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16909

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #8 re Wells Fargo Bank N.A. EH

Docket 200

Tentative Ruling:

9/13/18

BACKGROUND:

On August 2, 2016, Edward & Georgia Zozaya ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On September 15, 2016, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On December 16, 2016, Wells Fargo Bank ("Creditor") filed a proof of claim for a secured claim in the amount of $321,681.25 ("Claim 8"). Claim 8 appears to include

$22,923.99 in prepetition arrears. Subsequently, there were four notices of mortgage payment change. On July 26, 2018, the Court entered an order on Debtor’s motion for authority to enter into loan modification [Dkt. No. 195]. The order stated, in part:

Debtor(s) shall file a motion to modify their Plan and amended Schedules I and J to properly treat any arrears or change in mortgage payment that results from a final loan modification;
Debtor(s) must address in the motion to modify whether any further payments are to be made through the plan on mortgage arrears altered by the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya
modification; and

Chapter 13
Debtor(s) shall also object to any claim for the mortgage arrears or obtain an amended proof of claim within 30 days of a final loan modification

On August 6, 2018, Debtors filed an objection to Claim 8. Debtors assert that the loan modification eliminated the existing arrears

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Chapter 13

preponderance of the evidence. See In re Consol. Pioneer Mort, 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant. See Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; see also Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, the Debtors have not presented evidence that the loan modification has been finalized.

The Court notes that the order authorizing entry into a loan modification program also contemplated amended schedules and a motion to modify plan. Debtors have not taken either of those steps at present. It appears that the relief requested by Debtors requires a motion to modify plan.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.

APPEARANECS REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Dana Travis

Chapter 13

Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-17859

Juan Aguilera

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Motion to vacate dismissal From: 8/30/18

Docket 73

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Aguilera Represented By A Mina Tran

Movant(s):

Juan Aguilera Represented By A Mina Tran

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Movant(s):

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11770

Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola

Chapter 13 #8.00 Debtor's Motion for Order Disallowing the Claim 13-1 filed by Santander Consumer USA, Inc.

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:

9/13/18

BACKGROUND:

On March 6, 2018, Raymond & Estela Burrola ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On May 30, 2018, Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On June 19, 2018, Chrysler Capital ("Creditor") filed an unsecured proof of claim in the amount of $18,960.42 ("Claim 13"). On August 3, 2018, Debtors filed an objection to Claim 13. Debtors argue that Claim 13 should be disallowed as untimely.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola

Chapter 13

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9) provides:

Except as provide in subsections (c)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that –

11:00 AM

CONT...

Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola

(9) proof of such claim is not timely filed, except to the extent tardily filed as permitted under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 726(a) of this title or under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, except that a claim of a governmental unit shall be timely filed if it is filed before 180 days after the date of the order for relief or such later time

Chapter 13

as the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure may provide, and except that in a case under chapter 13, a claim of a governmental unit for a tax with respect to a return filed under section 1308 shall be timely if the claim is filed on or before the date that is 60 days after the date on which such return was filed as required.

Here, the claims deadline was May 15, 2018. None of the enumerated exceptions being applicable to the instant situation, Creditor’s Claim 13 was filed untimely. Therefore, the Court will sustain the objection.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection as DISALLOW Claim 13 as untimely.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Raymond Burrola Represented By Elena Steers

Joint Debtor(s):

Estela Burrola Represented By Elena Steers

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Raymond Burrola and Estela Burrola

Chapter 13

Raymond Burrola Represented By Elena Steers

Estela Burrola Represented By Elena Steers

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-28940

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13 #9.00 Motion for Leave to File New Order on Debtors' Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Debtor's Principal Residence.

Docket 124

Tentative Ruling:

9/13/18

BACKGROUND

On November 21, 2013, Jose & Hiliana Castellanos ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Debtors previously received a discharge in a Chapter 7 proceeding on October 21, 2010. As such, Debtors were ineligible for a discharge in the instant case.

On December 17, 2013, Debtors converted their case to Chapter 13. On December 24, 2013, Debtors filed a motion to avoid liens pursuant to § 506(d). The motion requested that the second and third liens on Debtors’ principal residence, held by Bank of America and Excel National Bank, respectively be avoided conditioned upon "receipt of a chapter 13 discharge." On March 10, 2014, the Court granted the relief sought in the motion.

On June 6, 2018, the Chapter 13 trustee filed his final report. On July 3, 2018, Debtors filed a motion for leave to file new order on Debtors’ motion to avoid junior lien. On July 25, 2018, Debtors re-filed the motion, and the matter was set for hearing.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

DISCUSSION

Debtors appear to argue that 11 U.S.C. § 105 provides the basis for the relief requested FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED.

R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, however, provides the mechanism whereby a party can seek relief from a final order. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(c)(1), however, Debtors are time-barred from bringing an argument under FED. R. CIV. P Rule 60(b)(1)-(3). Therefore, the only applicable bases for relief are FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(4)-(6).

The motion filed by Debtors does not provide adequate information to allow the Court to apply the applicable legal framework, even if the Court were to construe the motion as requesting relief pursuant to an appropriate legal provision.

Furthermore, in light of this Court’s ruling in In re Washington, 587 B.R. 349 (Bankr.

C.D. Cal. 2018), permitting Debtors to amend their motion at the end of their case would be prejudicial to creditors and would open up a legal loophole. Pursuant to In re Washington, the Debtors may be required to pay the claims of the contingently avoided lienholders through the Chapter 13 plan pro rata with other unsecured creditors. Allowing Debtors to fix their own mistake, at the conclusion of the case, would allow Debtors to avoid the secured claims of the junior lienholders while avoiding paying those claims through the Chapter 13 plan, a result expressly rejected by In re Washington.

In conclusion, Debtors have failed to identify the appropriate legal provision for the relief requested, have failed to make an adequate legal showing to justify relief under a legally appropriate provision, and have requested relief which, if granted, would contravene this Court’s decision in In re Washington. For all the above reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner

Joint Debtor(s):

Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner

Movant(s):

Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner Mark E Brenner

Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16578

Angela M. Sandoval

Chapter 13 #10.00 Motion to Value Collateral held by Balboa Thrift & Loan EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

9/13/2018

BACKGROUND

On August 3, 2018, Angela Sandoval ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Among the assets of the estate is a 2016 Honda Accord EX-L (the "Property"). On August 13, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to determine the value of the property. On August 23, 2018, Balboa Thrift & Loan ("Balboa") filed a secured claim in the amount of $26,362.90 ("Claim 4"). On August 30, 2018, Balboa filed its opposition.

Debtor’s motion contends that the value of the Property is $15,089, leaving an unsecured balance of $11,273.90. Balboa’s opposition contends that the value of the Property is $20,538.

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Angela M. Sandoval

Chapter 13

Presently the Ninth Circuit has not established a uniform method for valuations. See In re Ayres, 2010 WL 652825 at *5 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2010) (collecting cases detailing vehicle valuation and describing the state of the law in the Ninth Circuit). In In re Morales, however, which this Court has previously cited with approval, it was determined that retail value should be calculated "by adjusting the Kelley Blue Book or N.A.D.A. Guide retail value for a like vehicle by a reasonable amount in light of the evidence presented regarding the condition of the vehicle or any other relevant factors." In re Morales, 387 B.R. 36, 45 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2008).

According to the court in In re Morales, the retail values, and not the private party values, are the appropriate starting points because the text of § 506(a)(2) refers to "the price a retail merchant would charge" and does not refer to the price a private party would charge. Morales at 46.

Here, Debtor has provided a Kelly Blue Book report stating that the trade-in value of the Property is $15,043. Balboa, on the other hand, provides an (unauthenticated) Kelly Blue Book report which states that the "lending value" is $19,570 and the "typical listing price" is $21,506. Balboa proposes to take the average of the two identifies values, for reasons that are unclear. Given that Balboa has failed to properly authenticate its evidence or explain its method in arriving at its proposed figure, the Court is inclined to continue the matter for the parties to file supplements, if desired.

Finally, Balboa’s arguments as to the appropriate interest rate are not appropriately raised in an opposition to a motion to value.

Tentative Ruling:

The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the matter for the parties to file supplemental declarations or evidence.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Angela M. Sandoval

Chapter 13

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Angela M. Sandoval Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Movant(s):

Angela M. Sandoval Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian Rabin J Pournazarian Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14388

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13 #11.00 Motion for Setting Property Value EH

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

9/13/2018

BACKGROUND

On May 23, 2018, Jesus & Virginia Pabloff ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 33695 Marigold Ln., Murrieta, CA 92563, the principal residence of Debtors (the "Property"). On August 17, 2018, Debtors filed a motion to determine the value of the property.

Debtors; motion contends that the value of the Property is $420,000. Debtors’ motion appears to be an attempt to bifurcate the lien of the Internal Revenue Service into a secured claim in the amount of $17,175.04 and an unsecured claim of $145,037.39.

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2) states:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

(b) Subject to subsections (a) and (c) of this section, the plan may –

(2) modify the rights of holders of secured claims, other than a claim secured only a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence, or of holders of unsecured claims, or leave unaffected the rights of holders of any class of claims

Chapter 13

Here, the claim of the IRS is secured by Property, which is real property that is the debtor’s principal residence, and, therefore, Debtors cannot utilize § 1322(b)(2) to bifurcate the claim.

Because Debtors’ motion was filed for a legally impermissible basis, the Court declines to engage in the merits of a valuation which would serve no purpose.

Tentative Ruling:

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus Pabloff Represented By

Tom A Moore

Joint Debtor(s):

Virginia Pabloff Represented By Tom A Moore

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13

Jesus Pabloff Represented By

Tom A Moore

Virginia Pabloff Represented By Tom A Moore

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14257

Adam Casey Addison

Chapter 13 #12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adam Casey Addison Represented By Nima S Vokshori Luke Jackson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14603

Gabriel Agustin Blanco and Jeneke Nicole Blanco

Chapter 13 #13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 8/2/18, 8/23/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gabriel Agustin Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Joint Debtor(s):

Jeneke Nicole Blanco Represented By Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14816

Daniel W. Sargent

Chapter 13 #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 8/23/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Daniel W. Sargent Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15587

Romeo Labastida

Chapter 13 #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/20/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Lewis K. Chism Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Latoya A. Chism Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15614

Javier Ortega

Chapter 13 #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Javier Ortega Represented By

Alon Darvish

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15617

Juan Vargas and Anabely E Vargas

Chapter 13 #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Vargas Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Anabely E Vargas Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15643

Letheron Antonio May

Chapter 13 #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Letheron Antonio May Represented By Marco A Torres

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15664

Norberto Calalay Jimenez and Araceli Corrales Jimenez

Chapter 13 #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Norberto Calalay Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Araceli Corrales Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15703

Steve Jaime

Chapter 13 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Steve Jaime Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15704

Jackie May Zapata

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jackie May Zapata Represented By Daniel King

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15727

Kalake Monisoni Toutai

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kalake Monisoni Toutai Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15728

Jacob Joseph, Jr

Chapter 13 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joint Debtor(s):

Ronnie L Neville Represented By Hayk Grigoryan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15795

Wanda Gonzalez and Filiberto Marquez Gonzalez

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Wanda Gonzalez Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Joint Debtor(s):

Filiberto Marquez Gonzalez Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15836

David Michael Mason and Shannon Leigh Mason

Chapter 13 #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/9/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Michael Mason Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Joint Debtor(s):

Shannon Leigh Mason Represented By

Bryant C MacDonald

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15853

Luisa Demelo Luis

Chapter 13 #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 7/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Fernando Rodriguez Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Gabriela Rodriguez Represented By Tamar Terzian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:13-18557

Michael Anthony Clay and Brenda Ann Clay

Chapter 13 #36.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 275

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael Anthony Clay Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Brenda Ann Clay Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-13510

Carmen Lucya Mendez

Chapter 13 #37.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Carmen Lucya Mendez Represented By Sara E Razavi

Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-17491

Rosalie Estella Crouch

Chapter 13 #38.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/30/18

Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rosalie Estella Crouch Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-20076

Delfina Ramos Hernandez

Chapter 13 #39.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 82

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

9/4/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Delfina Ramos Hernandez Represented By Edward G Topolski

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-24084

Michael Lee Barnes and Belinda Ann Barnes

Chapter 13 #40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 120

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael Lee Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Belinda Ann Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-20062

Lilia Ivethe Fong

Chapter 13 #41.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lilia Ivethe Fong Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-10385

Adolfo Gonzalez and Angelica Gonzalez

Chapter 13 #42.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 68

Isaias Melo and Rosa Melo

Chapter 13 #48.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Isaias Melo Represented By

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Rebecca Anne Abercrombie Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-17612

Jose Guadalupe Sandoval

Chapter 13 #56.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 22

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Rodrigo Fernando Ramirez Guinea Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-19853

Diego Lopez

Chapter 13 #60.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Diego Lopez Represented By

Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20262

Alma Barbara Ewing

Chapter 7 #61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON

9/7/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alma Barbara Ewing Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20382

Raymond Ballejos and Veronica Ballejos

Chapter 13 #62.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Santiago A. Anonical Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Shallee V Anonical Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-11989

Tina M Fugitt

Chapter 13 #66.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 30

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/11/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lilia Ivethe Fong Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Monday, September 17, 2018

Hearing Room

303

2:00 PM

6:18-17624

Jose Antonio Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1931 Hammingway Pl, San Jacinto CA 92583

MOVANT: JOSE VELASCO & LILIAN MICAELA VELASCO

Docket 12

Party Information

Docket 254

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles Frederick Biehl Represented By

Daryl L Binkley - DISBARRED - Steven L Bryson

Movant(s):

Caliber Home Loans, Inc. Represented By Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By James C Bastian Jr

10:00 AM

CONT...

Charles Frederick Biehl

Elyza P Eshaghi Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui Leonard M Shulman

Chapter 7

10:00 AM

6:15-10929

Christopher John Helme

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9950 Sofia Court, Moreno Valley, California 92557

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 161

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher John Helme Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

US Bank National Association, as Represented By

Tyneia Merritt

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Christopher John Helme

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-12700

Eugene Alexis Padilla

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 420 Fenmore Drive, Barstow, CA 92311

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

From: 8/21/18 EH

Docket 31

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Eugene Alexis Padilla Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

Freedom Mortgage Corporation, its Represented By

Kristin A Zilberstein Merdaud Jafarnia Nancy L Lee

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Eugene Alexis Padilla

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-15893

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Cruze, VIN 1G1BE5SM3G7250074

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

Chapter 13

Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-20650

Silvia Patricia Zepeda

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Toyota Camry, VIN 4T1BF1FK4EU771580

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA dba WELLS FARGO DEALER SERVICES

Docket 44

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Silvia Patricia Zepeda Represented By James F Drake

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By

Sheryl K Ith

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Silvia Patricia Zepeda

Chapter 7

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10414

Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda

Chapter 13 #6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14785 Alba Way, Moreno Valley, CA 92553

MOVANT: PACIFIC UNION FINANCIAL LLC

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Leonel Villa Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucila Pineda Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Pacific Union Financial, LLC Represented By Nancy L Lee

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10740

Karin Olaya

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1660 Quail Summit Dr Beaumont, CA 92223

MOVANT: U.S. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT request for relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on multiple bankruptcies affecting the property (four filings in nine months). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Karin Olaya Represented By

Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

10:00 AM

6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13 #8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 150 W. Highland Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: MILESTONE FINANCIAL LLC

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

As a preliminary note, the Court notes that Local Rule 4001-(1)(c)(4) states that: "[a] motion for relief from the automatic stay must be filed separately from, and not combined in the same document with, any other request for relief, unless otherwise ordered by the court." Therefore, the default position is that the alternative requests made by Movant, for dismissal of the case or modification of the plan, are inappropriately brought in conjunction with a motion for relief from stay. Here, the Court is inclined to not deviate from the default position, because such requests are more appropriately heard on a Chapter 13 calendar when the Chapter 13 Trustee is present. Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY the alternative requests for dismissal of the case or modification of the plan without prejudice.

Regarding the request for relief from the automatic stay, the Court notes that Debtor is correct in asserting that the Chapter 13 plan is a conduit plan, with payments to be made to Del Toro Loan Servicing, Movant’s servicer, through the plan. While the Court notes that the docket does not reflect that a motion to dismiss for delinquency has been filed in this case, Debtor has not provided any supporting documentation indicating that the Chapter 13 plan payments are current.

10:00 AM

CONT...

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13

Parties to discuss status of Chapter 13 plan payments and whether funds have been received by Movant and/or its loan servicer, Del Toro Loan Servicing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Movant(s):

Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12862

Antoinette Marie Tutt

Chapter 13 #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5527 North Valles Drive, San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to discuss status of arrears, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Antoinette Marie Tutt Represented By Brian C Miles

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank Trust National Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14278

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13 #10.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 TOYOTA PRIUS, VIN: JTDZ N3EU 7D31 87716

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Bruce Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Tina Marie Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13

MECHANICS BANK Represented By Vincent V Frounjian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14516

Gary Ray Osborn

Chapter 13 #11.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: sales proceeds from 1754 Valley Park Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 per dissolution of marriage & statement of decision in state court action

MOVANT: CATHERINE OSBORN

From: 7/31/18 EH

Docket 16

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

8/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gary Ray Osborn Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

Catherine Osborn Represented By Robert S Altagen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14945

Harish S. Sharma and Neha H. Sharma

Chapter 7 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14346 Settlers Ridge Court, Corona, CA 92880

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

Docket 28

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

9/5/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Harish S. Sharma Represented By Mark J Markus

Joint Debtor(s):

Neha H. Sharma Represented By Mark J Markus

Movant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-15893

Juan Duran

Chapter 7 #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 30622 Via Pared, Thousand Palms, CA 92276

MOVANT: VILLAGE CAPITAL & INVESTMENT, LLC

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan Duran Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Movant(s):

Village Capital & Investment, LLC Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16311

Gregory Lee Haan, Jr. and Yisel Haan

Chapter 7 #14.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Buick Enclave

MOVANT: WESCOM CREDIT UNION

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gregory Lee Haan Jr. Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Joint Debtor(s):

Yisel Haan Represented By

Terrence Fantauzzi

Movant(s):

Wescom Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Gregory Lee Haan, Jr. and Yisel Haan

Chapter 7

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16356

Kenneth Ronald Wolf and Carol Janet Wolf

Chapter 7 #15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Kia Optima, VIN: 5XXGV4L23GG074901

MOVANT: KIA MOTORS FINANCE

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kenneth Ronald Wolf Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Carol Janet Wolf Represented By Dana Travis

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Kenneth Ronald Wolf and Carol Janet Wolf

Chapter 7

Kia Motors Finance Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16399

Charles J. La Chapelle and Doris L La Chapelle

Chapter 7 #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Dodge Journey, VIN: 3C4PDCDG4CT180053

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles J. La Chapelle Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Joint Debtor(s):

Doris L La Chapelle Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Charles J. La Chapelle and Doris L La Chapelle

Chapter 7

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16683

Sherry Ann Beardsley

Chapter 13 #17.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1041 W 27th St, San Bernardino, CA 92405-3121 Under 11

U.S.C. § 362

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

CASE DISMISSED 8/27/18

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(4) based on multiple bankruptcy filings (four cases since March 2015) affecting the subject real property and the fact that the instant filing was a skeletal filing which was summarily dismissed. GRANT relief from Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY all remaining requests as moot because this case was dismissed on August 27, 2018.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sherry Ann Beardsley Pro Se

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By

Dane W Exnowski

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Sherry Ann Beardsley

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17018

Brittany Nicole Britt and Joshua Britt

Chapter 7 #18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Ford Flex, VIN: 2FMGK5C86FBA21056

MOVANT: CAB WEST LLC

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brittany Nicole Britt Represented By Aaron Lloyd

Joint Debtor(s):

Joshua Britt Represented By

Aaron Lloyd

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Brittany Nicole Britt and Joshua Britt

Chapter 7

Cab West LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17504

Jossue Aly Majana

Chapter 13 #19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 25842 Dove Street, Corona, CA 92883

MOVANT: TERRA MADERIOS

CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service: Unclear Opposition: None

Because the case was dismissed, the Court is inclined to DENY the requests for relief from stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 1301(a) as moot, and DENY request under ¶ 2.

DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(4). Movant appears to be the owner of the subject Property and not a secured creidtor. DENY request for relief under ¶ 7 for lack of cause shown. DENY request for relief under ¶ 6 and DENY waiver of Rule 4001(a) stay.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jossue Aly Majana Pro Se

Movant(s):

Terra Maderios Represented By Michael E Hickey

10:00 AM

CONT...

Jossue Aly Majana

Chapter 13

Michael E. Hickey Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17677

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng and Christine Achieng Matoka

Chapter 13 #20.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 4123 Pearl Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530

MOVANT: CHRISTINE ACHIEHG MATOKA

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

The Court notes the following issues raised by the Motion:

The Notice of Motion incorrectly indicated that the hearing was on "regular" rather than "shortened" notice;
The Amended Notice did not name Amerihome as an interested party; and
The Text on §3(f), pg 6, is cut off.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Christine Achieng Matoka Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng and Christine Achieng Matoka

John F Brady

Chapter 13

Christine Achieng Matoka Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17886

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13 #20.10 Amended Motion (related document(s): 11 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1657 Via Verde Drive Rialto, CA 92377 SAN BERNARDINO . filed by Debtor Ricky Antonio Scott, Joint Debtor Shemida Shiloni Scott)

MOVANT: RICKY ANTONIO SCOTT AND SHEMIDA SHILONI SCOTT

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

09/25/2018

The Debtors’ prior case was dismissed on July 25, 2018, for failure to submit 2017 federal and state tax returns to the Trustee. The Debtors and their counsel did not appear at the hearing and the case was dismissed. The Debtors have obtained new counsel. In support of their Motion, they assert that they believed they had complied with the Trustee’s request for the returns by submitting Debtor Husband’s returns but failed to notify the Trustee that the co-debtor was not required to file taxes.

Additionally, the Debtors assert that because their plan proposed a 100% payout to creditors, they were not require to provide refund monies to the estate.

Here the Debtors request that their stay be continued as to the foreclosing creditor, Wells Fargo, who has a sale scheduled for September 26, 2018.

The Debtors have provided sufficient evidence to overcome the § 362(c)(3)(C) presumption that the case was not filed in good faith given that a relief from stay was pending in the prior case as to Wells Fargo when the case was dismissed.

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to Wells Fargo, the foreclosing creditor.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

10:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Party Information

Chapter 13

Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands

Joint Debtor(s):

Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands

Movant(s):

Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands

Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-15717

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11 #21.00 CONT Motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: Federal Insurance Co., et al vs. AMJ Plumbing Specialist, docket number BC649108; Los Angeles Superior Court, Los Angeles

MOVANT: FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY

From: 8/28/18 EH

Docket 162

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

08/28/2018

Service is Improper Opposition: None

The Court finds that the attachment to the proof of service provides insufficient evidence of the parties served with the Motion and the manner of service. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to September 25, 2018, at 2:00

p.m. for Movant to file and serve an Amended Notice of Motion and Motion with notice of the continued hearing date and a properly completed proof of service. The deadline for Movant to file the amended pleadings is September 3, 2018.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By

David Lozano

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11

Emporium Hardwoods Operating Represented By

Susan M Benson

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:16-01279 Allied Injury Management, Inc. v. One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group

#22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01279. Complaint by Allied Injury Management, Inc. against One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group & Therapy, Inc., One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group, Inc., Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Group, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Account Stated; and (3) Unjust Enrichment Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 1/24/17, 3/7/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By

Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta

One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By

Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta

Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Represented By

Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Plaintiff(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:16-01225 Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC v. Allied Injury Management,

#23.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC against Allied Injury Management, Inc., John C. Larson. 02 - Other e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy

HOLDING DATE

From: 11/1/16, 12/6/16, 1/31/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 10/3/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

John C. Larson Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Cambridge Medical Funding Group Represented By

Kenneth Hennesay

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11 #24.00 CONT First Omnibus Objection of Debtor-In-Possession Allied Injury Management, Inc. Seeking Disallowance of Certain Proofs of Claim (Holding Date)

From: 11/8/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 3/7/17,4/4/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18

Also #25 EH

Docket 83

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Movant(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11 #25.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 6/7/16, 8/30/16, 9/14/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18

Also #24 EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11 #26.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Confirming Termination of Stay under 11

U.S.C. 362(j) or That No Stay is in Effect under 11 U.S.C. 362(c)(4)(A)(ii) 5065 Brooks Street, Montclair, CA 91763

MOVANT: TAYLOR FAMILY TRUST OF JUNE 16, 2004

Also #27 & #28 EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service: Adequate Opposition: None

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A), the automatic stay in the instant case expired on the 30th day after the petition date. Here, Debtor filed an untimely motion to continue the automatic stay (set as matter 27 on the docket), which the Court, through a tentative ruling, has indicated it is inclined to deny. While Debtor offers various general arguments regarding the status of the case, Debtor has not provided a cognizable basis to support the denial of this motion. Therefore, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, confirming that the automatic stay terminated on August 22, 2018.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

Taylor Family Trust of June 16, 2004 Represented By

Paul J Gutierrez

2:00 PM

6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11 #27.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 30 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 5065 Brooks Street, Montclair, Ca 91763 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay

MOVANT: RICHARD GARAVITO

Also #26 & #28 EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(B), a motion to continue the automatic stay must be filed and heard within thirty days of the petition here. Here, the instant motion was filed forty-six days after the petition date, and the matter was set for hearing sixty-four days after the petition. While Debtor acknowledges the above time limitation in the motion, Debtor has provided no argument or basis to avoid the conclusion that the request sought in the motion is statutorily barred as untimely. The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

2:00 PM

6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11 #28.00 Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case Also #26 & #27

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

BACKGROUND

On July 23, 2018, Richard Garavito ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. Debtor previously filed a Chapter 13 case on April 17, 2018, which was dismissed on July 19, 2018.

On August 29, 2018, the Taylor Family Trust of June 16, 2004 ("Creditor"), the primary creditor in the instant case, filed a motion to confirm that the automatic stay terminated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A). On September 7, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to continue/impose the automatic stay. Because Debtor has not offered a cognizable legal argument as to why the automatic stay has not terminated, or why Debtor can obtain a continuation of the automatic stay after the statutory deadline, the Court has posted tentative rulings indicating that it intends to grant Creditor’s motion and deny Debtor’s motion.

On September 11, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the case and an application shortening time. On September 13, 2018, the Court approved the application shortening time, and set a hearing for September 25, 2018.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(1) states:

Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party in interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4) provides a non-exclusive list of sixteen examples of cause – most of which are more appropriately considered when the moving party is an entity other than the debtor.

Here, Debtor’s motion is unclear, at best. The entire argument why the case should be dismissed is reproduced, verbatim, as follows:

In the present case, since the motion to impose and/or continue the stay was not timely filed, the stay will no longer be in effect with the pending motion to terminate the stay filed by secured creditor Taylor Family Trust.

The Debtor should not be penalized due to counsel’s inadvertent calendaring error of the 30 days rule of filing a motion to impose and/or continue the stay. However, an argument can be made that under the majority approach a motion

2:00 PM

CONT...

Richard Garavito

to impose or continue the stay shall be filed as to the Debtor individually and not as to the property of the estate. Here, the Subject Property is property of

Chapter 11

the estate and the automatic stay should be in effect as to the Subject Property.

However, due to circumstances surrounding the possible termination of the stay, the Debtor requests dismissal of this case as there is no purpose if the stay is not in effect as to the Subject Property.

[Dkt. No. 37, pg. 5]. In summary, Debtor acknowledges that the stay has statutorily terminated and the deadline to continue the automatic stay has lapsed, but then argues that such stay termination is with regards to the Debtor only, not property of the estate. Despite the argument, the Debtor then asserts that due to "circumstances" the Debtor requests dismissal because there is "no purpose" if the stay has also terminated as to property of the estate.

There are multiple issues with the above line of argument. First, Debtor does not appear to have raised any coherent cause for dismissal – the only argument made in favor of dismissal, that the "Subject Property" is not protected by the automatic stay, (and thus this Chapter 11 case cannot be successful) is also explicitly rejected by Debtor. Second, § 1112(b) requires the Court to consider whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 is in the best interests of creditors and the estate. Here, Debtor’s schedules filed in the instant case indicate that all creditors would likely be paid in full if this case was converted to Chapter 7. Therefore, pursuant to the analysis required by § 1112(b), it is unclear why this case would be dismissed rather than converted to Chapter 7.

Finally, the Court acknowledges that, in a reply relating to its motion to confirm that the automatic stay has terminated, Creditor has requested that, if the case is dismissed, Debtor be restricted from re-filing by a bar. While raising this argument in a reply relating to a different motion is procedurally improper, the Court need not address the request at the current time given the issues above.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

TENTATIVE RULING

Debtor and Creditor to argue: (1) whether there is cause for dismissal; (2) whether the automatic stay is in effect as to the Subject Property; and (3) whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 would be in the best interests of creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

Movant(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

2:00 PM

6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11 #29.00 Pacific Steel Group's Objection to Insider Compensation Also #30

Docket 77

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

2:00 PM

6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11 #30.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18 Also #29

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

2:00 PM

6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11 #31.00 Motion to Allow Claims:

# 9 - Donahoo & Associates PC #10 - Juan Catano

#11 - Faustino Magana Also #32 & #33

Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:

09/25/2018

BACKGROUND

On March 27, 2018, G Hurtado Construction, Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The bankruptcy was precipitated by a wage and hour lawsuit brought by two and possibly more former employees. Catana and Faustino v. G Hurtado Construction, Inc. On May 9, 2018, the Debtor issued a Notice of Bar Date indicating that the Court set a deadline of July 13, 2018 ("Bar Date"), for creditors to file proofs of claims against the Debtor’s estate.

On July 16, 2018, the following claims were filed: Claim #9 by Donahoo & Associates, PC in the amount of $134,475.02, Claim #10 by Juan Catano in the amount of $230,081.64, Claim #11 by Faustino Magana in the amount of $101,240.04 (collectively, "Litigation Claimants")

On August 29, 2018, the Litigation Claimants filed a Motion to allow their claims ("Motion"). Opposition was filed by the Debtor on September 10, 2018 ("Opposition"). On September 17, 2018, the Litigation Claimants filed their Reply to the Opposition ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

The Litigation Claimants seek the Court’s permission to allow their claims as timely pursuant to FRBP 9006(b)(1). In support of the Motion, the Litigation Claimants have provided evidence that the claims at issue were ready on the Bar Date

2:00 PM

CONT...

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

but that due to "a misunderstanding", the claims were mailed to the Court instead of being personally filed by an attorney service. The result is that the claims arrived three days late. In response, the Debtor argues that the failure to timely file a claim was based on mistake, not excusable neglect, and that even assuming, arguendo, that there was neglect, that that neglect was not excusable.

The Court in Pioneer recognized that "excusable neglect" is a flexible, equitable concept, and also reminded us that "inadvertence, ignorance of the rules, or mistakes construing the rules do not usually constitute ‘excusable’ neglect." Pioneer at 389; Kyle v. Campbell Soup Co., 28 F.3d 928, 931 (9th Cir. 1994), as amended on denial of reh'g (Apr. 8, 1994). Although the Debtor argues that the Litigation Claimants’ statements amount to grounds under the concept of ‘mistake’ and not ‘excusable neglect’, the facts belie that assertion. Specifically, the declaration of Mr. Danhoo clearly indicates his instruction to his paralegal was to file the proof of claims on the bar date. There is no evidence or argument that the failure of the paralegal to accurately follow the instruction was due to a mistake in interpreting or applying the applicable rules. Instead, the facts presented comport most closely with the definition of "neglect" indicated in Pioneer, i.e., "to give little attention or respect" to a matter, or "to leave undone or unattended to esp[ecially] through carelessness. Pioneer at 389. The word therefore encompasses both simple, faultless omissions to act and, more commonly, omissions caused by carelessness. Id. Here, it is is either the carelessness of the attorney in supervising the paralegal, or of the paralegal in following the instruction that most likely resulted in the mailing of the proofs of claim. As such, the remaining issue is whether the neglect in evidence is excusable.

The determination of whether neglect is "excusable" is "an equitable one, taking account of all relevant circumstances surrounding the party's omission." Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 507 U.S. 380, 395, 113 S.Ct. 1489, 123 L.Ed.2d 74 (1993). Such circumstances include "the danger of prejudice to the debtor, the length of the delay and its potential impact on judicial proceedings, the reason for the delay ... and whether the movant acted in good faith." Id. This list is not exhaustive. In re Zilog, Inc., 450 F.3d 996, 1003 (9th Cir. 2006). The determination is essentially an equitable one, taking account of all relevant circumstances surrounding a party's omission. In re Gordian Med., Inc., 499 B.R. 793, 798 (Bankr. C.D. Cal.

2013). No single circumstance in isolation compels a particular result regardless of the other factors. Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d 379, 382 n. 2 (9th Cir.1997).

2:00 PM

CONT...

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

As to the length of the delay, the claims at issue were filed only three days late, which weighs in favor of allowing the claims. Additionally there is no evidence that the Litigation Claimants have acted other than in good faith. This second factor weighs in favor of allowing the claims.

The two remaining elements of the Pioneer test are danger of prejudice to the debtor and potential impact on judicial proceedings (and length of the delay in the claim's filing). As to a chapter 11 case,

When a proof of claim is timely filed, it puts the debtor and other parties in interest in a bankruptcy case on notice that a particular creditor is asserting a right to payment. When a proof of claim is filed after the bar date, this notice is delayed by the length of time running from the bar date to the date of the untimely claim's filing. During this interval, the debtor and other parties in interest may have taken action in reliance on their knowledge of the body of claims in the case as of the close of the bar date. For example, armed with information about the total amount of filed claims, a debtor may have reached certain tentative conclusions about how much it could afford to pay under a chapter 11 plan and, on that basis, conducted negotiations with the unsecured creditors committee and perhaps secured creditors as well. Equally true, the debtor may have conveyed information to the bankruptcy court during status conferences about the anticipated timing for the filing of a disclosure statement and plan of reorganization, and the bankruptcy court may have taken such information into account in setting various deadlines in the case.

The filing of a late claim has the potential to upend such negotiations and any informal agreements that may have been reached with creditors as well as to require the bankruptcy court to reconsider its previously imposed deadlines. Each case turns on its own facts, and there may be other instances of prejudice to the debtor and an adverse impact on judicial proceedings beyond those mentioned above.

Gordian Med. at 799.

2:00 PM

CONT...

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

Here, there is no evidence that the short delay in filing the proofs of claim prejudiced the Debtor. To the contrary, the Litigation Claimants’ claims were identified by the Debtor as a primary factor precipitating the bankruptcy filing. Under these circumstances, absent evidence from the Debtor that the late filing of the claims has materially impacted negotiations or deadlines, the Court finds that the third and fourth factors weigh in favor of allowing the claims.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety. Finding that the failure of the Litigation Claimants to timely file their claims by the Bar Date was the result of excusable neglect and ordering the allowance of their claims under FRBP 9006(b)(1) as timely.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

Movant(s):

Donahoo & Associates, PC Represented By Richard E Donahoo

Faustino Magana Represented By Richard E Donahoo

Juan Catano Represented By

Richard E Donahoo

2:00 PM

6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11 #32.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 9/11/18

Also #31 & #33 EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

Movant(s):

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

2:00 PM

6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11 #33.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 5/8/18, 8/21/18, 9/11/18 Also #31 & #32

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

2:00 PM

6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11 #34.00 Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement Also #35

Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rick's Patio Inc Represented By

Robert B Rosenstein

Movant(s):

Rick's Patio Inc Represented By

Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein

2:00 PM

6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11 #35.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 4/24/18, 7/31/18 Also #34

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rick's Patio Inc Represented By

Robert B Rosenstein

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #36.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Debtors to Use Cash Collateral on Interim Basis; (2) Granting Adequate Protection to Secured Creditors; and (3) Scheduling a Final Hearing

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18 Also #37 & #40 EH

Docket 7

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #37.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order Authorizing The Debtor To Keep Two Pre- Petition Bank Accounts Open For The Sole Purpose of Accepting Electronic Deposits

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18 Also #36 & #40 EH

Docket 9

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #38.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Payment of PrePetition Payroll Obligations; and (2) Authorizing Debtor to Honor PrePetition Employment Procedures

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18 Also #36 & #40 EH

Docket 11

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #39.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Continuation of Utility Service and Approval of Adequate Assurance of Payment to Utility Company Under Section 366(b) , Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Ch 11 Case for Order Authorizing Debtor to Provide Adequate Assurance of Payment to Utility Service Providers (11 U.S.C. Sec. 366)

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18 Also #36 & #40 EH

Docket 12

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #40.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18 Also #36 & #39 EH

Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

11:00 AM

6:17-19444

Norberto Luna Lopez

Chapter 7 #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 25

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

09/26/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 990.93 Trustee Expenses: $ 14.81

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Norberto Luna Lopez Represented By Peter Recchia

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-19508

Kenneth Christopher Ware

Chapter 7 #2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 7,843.26 Trustee Expenses: $ 48.84

The TFR is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Kenneth Christopher Ware Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-19717

Brian James Cooper and Kellie Jeanne Rose-Cooper

Chapter 7 #3.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 25

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

09/26/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 1,267.70 Trustee Expenses: $ 58.22

The TFR is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brian James Cooper Represented By Jeremiah D Raxter

Joint Debtor(s):

Kellie Jeanne Rose-Cooper Represented By Jeremiah D Raxter

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Brian James Cooper and Kellie Jeanne Rose-Cooper

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-10841

Theresa Susanne Ysiano

Chapter 7 #4.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

09/26/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 1,148 Trustee Expenses: $ 37.90

The TFR is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Theresa Susanne Ysiano Represented By William J Howell

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-21418

James Lloyd Walker

Chapter 7 #5.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Property From: 4/11/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

BACKGROUND

On November 23, 2015 ("Petition Date"), James Lloyd Walker ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 13247 Mammoth Street in Hesperia, CA 92344 (the "Mammoth Street Property"). The Mammoth Street Property is currently being rented out by the Debtor.

On March 9, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion seeking turnover of the Mammoth Street Property ("Motion"). Specifically, the Trustee seeks an order:

Compelling the Debtor to turn over to the Trustee possession, custody, and control of the Mammoth Street Property, including any and all proceeds thereof as of and from the Petition Date and any and all other items to gain possession, custody and control of the Mammoth Street Property such as the property keys and security access codes;
Compelling the Debtor to turn over to the Trustee all books and records relating to the Mammoth Street Property, including an accounting of any and all proceeds thereof, as of and from the Petition Date; and
Requiring the Debtor to comply with the order on or before 14 days after the order becomes a final order.

11:00 AM

CONT... James Lloyd Walker

Subsequent to the filing of the Motion, the parties agreed to several

Chapter 7

continuances of the hearing for settlement discussions. Settlement discussions eventually resulted in an agreement by the Debtor to pay administrative costs in exchange for an agreement to retain the Mammoth Street Property. However, after learning the amount of administrative fees incurred, the Debtor changed his position regarding the agreement.

On September 14, 2018, the Debtor filed a response to the Motion ("Response"). On September 19, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

Under the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor has a duty to surrender property of the estate to the trustee. § 521(4). Furthermore, a trustee has the duty to "collect and reduce to money the property of the estate for which such trustee serves " § 704(1).

Finally, "any entity, other than a custodian, in possession, custody or control of property that the trustee may use, sell, or lease under section 363 of this title shall

deliver to the trustee, and account for, such property or the value of such property "

Id. § 542 (a).

The Response does not dispute that the Mammoth Street Property is property of the estate. The primary response is that the Debtor needs extra time to save the properties and that the Trustee is needlessly incurring administrative expenses. The issues surrounding the amount of administrative fees, however, are not currently before this Court. Thus, based on the plain language of §521 and § 542, and for the reasons set forth in the Motion, the Court is inclined to order turnover.

TENTATIVE RULING

For these reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety. The Debtor’s apparent refusal to cooperate and/or unwillingness to abide by the bankruptcy process are insufficient to justify further delay. The Court finds that turnover and an accounting are required by § 521 and § 542.

11:00 AM

CONT...

James Lloyd Walker

Chapter 7

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

James Lloyd Walker Represented By

Andrew Edward Smyth

Movant(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta Caroline Djang

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Cathy Ta Caroline Djang

11:00 AM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7 #6.00 CONT Application for Compensation for Brett Ramsaur, Trustee's Attorney, Period: 1/18/2017 to 2/28/2018, Fee: $38910.50, Expenses: $1554.36

From: 8/1/18 EH

Docket 183

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Court hereby approves Movant’s Interim Fee Application as follows:

The Fees Requested (of $38,910.50) are allowed; and
100% of Expenses Requested (or $1,554.36) are allowed.

As to fees allowed, Movant has established that legal services provided were reasonable and necessary.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

8/1/18

On February 26, 2016, Sam & Greeta Dason ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On February 22, 2017, the Court approved the employment application of Ramsaur Law Office ("Applicant") to serve as Trustee’s counsel. On March 6, 2017, the Court approved Trustee’s application to employ GlassRatner as real estate broker. On March 7, 2017, the Court approved the application of Karl T. Anderson CPA, Inc. to serve as Trustee’s
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason
accountant. Since the employment of these professionals, the Court has

Chapter 7
approved a Rule 9019 compromise [Dkt. No. 133] and two § 363 sale motions [Dkt. Nos. 146 & 172].
.

On July 11, 2018, Applicant filed the instant fee application. Local Rule 2016-(1)(a)(2)(A) states, in part:
In all cases where the employment of more than one professional person has been authorized by the court, a professional person who files an application for interim fees must give other professional persons employed in the case not less than 45 days notice of the date and time of the hearing.

Here, there was more than one professional person employed, yet Applicant did not comply with the above rule. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to September 26, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. to comply with the above rule.

Debtor(s):
APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to file and service notice of continuance.
Party Information
Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Joint Debtor(s):
Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Movant(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
11:00 AM
6:16-19799

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

#7.00 Motion to Allow Claim 24 and 25 of Chase Bank USA, NA as Late Filed Allowable Against a Surplus Only

Also #8 EH
Docket 72
Tentative Ruling:
09/26/2018

BACKGROUND:

On November 2, 2016, Jaison Vally Surace ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. John Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The deadline for filing claims in the case was April 11, 2017 ("Bar Date").

On August 20, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion for allowance of claims 24 and 25 of Chase Bank USA, NA as late filed claims allowable against the surplus only ("Objection"). No opposition or response has been filed.

ANALYSIS and TENTATIVE RULING

09/26/2018

The Trustee has provided evidence that the claims of Chase Bank were filed after the Bar Date. Based on the Trustee’s evidence, his request that the late-filed claims be paid against any surplus pursuant to § 726(a)(3) is appropriate and the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection on that basis.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Debtor(s):

Jaison Vally Surace

Party Information

Chapter 7
Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal Jeremy J Alberts
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
Anthony A Friedman
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
Anthony A Friedman
11:00 AM
6:16-19799

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

#8.00 Motion to Allow Claim 26 filed by Citibank, NA as Late Filed Allowable Against Surplus Funds Only

Also #7 EH
Docket 74
Tentative Ruling:
09/26/2018

BACKGROUND:

On November 2, 2016, Jaison Vally Surace ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. John Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The deadline for filing claims in the case was April 11, 2017 ("Bar Date").

On August 20, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion for allowance of Claim No. 26 of Citibank, N.A. as a late filed claims allowable against the surplus only ("Objection"). On September 14, 2018, the Debtor filed his opposition to the Objection ("Opposition") on the grounds that the debt should be disallowed for failure by Citibank to provide evidence to support its claim. On September 19, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply to the Opposition.

ANALYSIS and TENTATIVE RULING

09/26/2018

The Trustee has provided evidence that the claim of Citibank was filed after the Bar Date. Based on the Trustee’s evidence, his request that the late-filed claim be paid against any surplus pursuant to § 726(a)(3) is appropriate and the Court is
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7
inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection on that basis.

As to the Opposition, the Court agrees with the Trustee that the Debtor is advancing independent grounds for objection to claim and the request, which amounts to a request for disallowance of the claim must be brought by independent motion of the Debtor with notice to Citibank. For these reasons, and all of the reasons articulated by the Trustee, the Court finds that the Opposition must be disregarded.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jaison Vally Surace Represented By Batkhand Zoljargal Jeremy J Alberts
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
Anthony A Friedman
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Carmela Pagay
Anthony A Friedman
11:00 AM
6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

#9.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 8 filed by Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. as Not Allowable Against the Estate

From: 8/22/18 Also #10 - #12
EH

Docket 104
Tentative Ruling:
09/26/2018

BACKGROUND:

On September 8, 2015, the Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC ("Debtor") case was filed as an involuntary case. The Order for Relief was entered on November 13, 2015. John P. Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 8 ("Claim") of Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it is for services rendered to MCG Development, an entity that is not the Debtor and therefore not entitled to allowance as a claim.

On August 6, 2018, the Claimant filed its response to the Objection ("Response"). On September 19, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply ("Reply")
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, Trustee has pointed to the fact that the evidence attached to the Claim are addressed to Paul Minnick as a representative of MCG Development. In response, Claimant has provided the same documents referenced by the Trustee and has failed to provide any admissible evidence indicating that liability on the contract can be collected against the Debtor’s estate.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection disallowing Claim No. 8 of the Claimant.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By
Gaurav Datta
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

#10.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 10 filed by Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. as Not Allowable Against Estate

From:

Also #9 - #12 EH
Docket 108
Tentative Ruling:
08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On September 8, 2015, the Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC ("Debtor") case was filed as an involuntary case. The Order for Relief was entered on November 13, 2015. John P. Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 10 ("Claim") of Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it is for services rendered to MCG Development, which is an entity that is not the Debtor and therefore is not entitled to allowance as a claim. The Objection was properly served and no opposition or response has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, the Trustee has pointed to facts tending to defeat the claim by virtue of the fact that Claimant’s own supporting documentation evinces a contractual relationship with Paul Minnick as representative of MCG Development Company, Inc., not on behalf of the Debtor. Absent evidence of a relationship between the Debtor and Claimant, the Claimant has failed to establish the existence of a claim against the Debtor’s estate.

TENTATIVE RULING
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection and DISALLOW Claim No. 10 in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By
Gaurav Datta
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

#11.00 CONT Motion to Allow Claim 7 filed by Norman A. Musselman as Fully Secured, Not Entitled to a Dividend

From: 8/22/18 Also #9 - #12 EH
Docket 102
Tentative Ruling:
08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On September 8, 2015, the Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC ("Debtor") case was filed as an involuntary case. The Order for Relief was entered on November 13, 2015. John P. Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 7 ("Claim") of Norman Musselman (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is fully secured and not entitled to a dividend from the Estate.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Claim indicates that it is secured by a Recorded Deed of Trust and Note and that the fair market value of the Property at issue exceeds the amount of the Claim such that it is fully secured. The Trustee requests that the Claim be allowed as fully secured but not entitled to a dividend from the estate. Based on the lack of prejudice to the Claimant and the Claimant’s failure to file response or opposition which this Court deems as consent pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h), the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the objection and ALLOW the Claim as a fully secured claim not entitled to a dividend.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information
11:00 AM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By
Gaurav Datta
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

#12.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 9 filed by Erwin L. Seifert as Not Allowable Against the Estate

From: 8/22/18 Also #9 - #11 EH
Docket 106
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/19/18
Tentative Ruling:
08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

On September 8, 2015, the Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC ("Debtor") case was filed as an involuntary case. The Order for Relief was entered on November 13, 2015. John P. Pringle is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 9 ("Claim") of Erwin L. Seifert (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it regards an employment contract between Claimant and MCG Development. The Objection was properly served and no opposition or response has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7
evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, the Trustee asserts that the Claim regards an employment contract between Claimant and MCG Development, not the Debtor. However, a separate Agreement dated May 27, 2014, between the Debtor and Claimant appears to indicate that although the employment contract was created between MDG Development and Claimant, the Debtor separately executed a Note and Deed of Trust in favor of Claimant to secure the obligations under the employment agreement in recognition that Claimant’s employment contract with MDG was "for the benefit of Manors …". (Objection at 18).
11:00 AM
CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the Agreement between Debtor and Claimant, which the Trustee has not addressed, the Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Objection without prejudice on the basis that the Agreement appears to form a basis for enforcement of the Claim against the Debtor’s estate.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By
Gaurav Datta
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

#13.00 Motion to Compel Debtor's and Counsel's Appearance at Continued 11 U.S.C. § 341(a) Meeting of Creditors

EH

Docket 42
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/17/18 AT 11:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Movant(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
6:18-15675

Ruben Thomas Rocha

Chapter 7

#14.00 Motion to set aside RE: Dismissal of Case EH
Docket 15
Tentative Ruling:
09/26/2018

TENTATIVE RULING

On September 5, 2018, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to properly sign the Declaration by Debtor regarding Income Received Within 60 Days of the Petition ("Declaration"). The Debtor has now moved to vacate the dismissal. The hearing has been set on shortened time per the Court’s order with opposition due at the hearing. The Debtor’s counsel indicates that although the Debtor had signed the deficient documents by the deadline, Counsel’s office inadvertently filed the incorrect Declaration, which resulted in the dismissal of the case. The Debtor has now filed the amended Declaration. Having corrected the basis for dismissal, and given there is no apparent prejudice to creditors, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion to Vacate Dismissal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ruben Thomas Rocha Represented By Edward T Weber
Movant(s):
Ruben Thomas Rocha Represented By Edward T Weber
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Ruben Thomas Rocha

Chapter 7
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7

#14.10 Trustees Motion For Entry Of An Order: (A) Approving Sale Of Real Property Free And Clear Of Certain Liens Or Interests; (B) Approving Overbid Procedures; (C) Approving The Carve-Out And Disbursements Of Sale Proceeds; And (D) Granting Related Relief

EH

Docket 121

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Movant(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#15.00 Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:13-bk-27611 with 6:15-ap-01307-MH ; 6:16- ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only

EH

Docket 88
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/3/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
Chad V Haes

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#16.00 Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248-MH with 6:15-ap-01307-MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only

EH

Docket 121
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/3/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Jerry Wang Represented By
Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
A. Cisneros Represented By
Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#17.00 Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248 with 6:15-ap-01307-MH ; 6:16- ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 [Amended] for Discovery Purposes Only

EH

Docket 77
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/3/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01199 Revere Financial Corporation v. Bank of Southern California, N.A.

#18.00 Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248-MH with 6:15-ap-01307-MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only

EH

Docket 99
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO10/3/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Bank of Southern California, N.A. Represented By
Kathryn M.S. Catherwood
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01085 PRINGLE v. Winn et al

#19.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01085. Complaint by JOHN P PRINGLE against Ralph Winn. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). and other Defendants including DOES 1-25 Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13-Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer, 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property,14 - Recovery of money/property - other, 91- Declaratory judgment)

From: 7/12/17, 8/23/17, 10/25/17, 5/16/18, 6/27/18

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/23/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
Defendant(s):
Ralph Winn Represented By
Douglas A Plazak
Sterling Security Service, Inc. Represented By Seth W Wiener
Natalia V Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener
Steven B Knoch Represented By Seth W Wiener
Stacy Winn Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Douglas A Plazak

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
JOHN P PRINGLE Represented By Charity J Manee Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:18-12027

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01156 Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Williams et al

#20.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01156. Complaint by Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee against Amy Williams, Richard M Thomas Jr.. (Charge To Estate) ($350.00). Complaint to: (1) Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer; (2) Obtain Declaratory Relief as to Ownership of Real Property; and
Authorize Sale of Property Owned in Part by Non-Debtor Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard M. Thomas Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Defendant(s):

Amy Williams Pro Se

Richard M Thomas Jr. Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Raquel Young Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Plaintiff(s):

Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By

Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Richard M. Thomas

Larry D Simons Frank X Ruggier

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#21.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding From: 7/11/18, 8/22/18

Also #22 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 8, 2017, Mark Bastorous & Bernadette Shenouda ("Debtors" or "Defendants") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition.

On March 12, 2018, Mina Farah ("Plaintiff" or "Creditor") filed a complaint against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda, and Does 1-10, inclusive ("Defendants") for nondischargeability pursuant to § 523(a)(2)(A). On April 11, 2018, the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The Plaintiff subsequently amended her complaint ("FAC") on May 3, 2018.

The FAC alleges the Plaintiff gave the Defendants $241,912.00 to invest in improvements to their real estate firm’s commercial office building. Plaintiff alleges the Defendants intentionally concealed other, pending senior liens on the property during negotiations. Plaintiff further contends that her note and deed of trust from Defendants were intentionally recorded in an untimely manner. The property became over-encumbered, as its fair market value was $2,360,000, but held a total debt of over $3,106,156, providing evidence of no intention to repay creditors. The Plaintiff believes her loan was used to buy a large parcel of property in Hesperia for

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Defendants’ personal use.

Plaintiff contends she relied on the Defendants’ misrepresentations when offering the loan, and would not have offered a loan but for the false promises. Her numerous repayment demands in 2016 and 2017 were unsuccessful. Plaintiff further asserts that the Defendants made false representations in a similar manner to another lender, Anis Khalil. Plaintiff asks for compensatory damages of a minimum of $300,000, and punitive damages in a minimum amount of $600,000.

On June 4, 2018, Defendants filed this motion to dismiss ("Motion") for failure to state a claim pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6). The Defendants allege the Plaintiff failed to claim nondischargeability under § 523(a)(2)(A) by not proving the claim’s required elements. The Defendants assert that the Plaintiff has merely pled allegations, rather than a claim upon which relief can be granted.

DISCUSSION

MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD

To avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
NON-DISCHARGEABILITY

Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), a debt is not discharged for money obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud. The elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim are well-established: (1) a representation; (2) that the debtor knew was false; (3)
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
that the debtor made with the intention of deceiving the creditor; (4) reliance on the representation by the creditor; (5) and damages as a proximate result of reliance on the representations. See, e.g., In re Eashai, 87 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 1996).

Here, the first sentence of the complaint indicates that the Plaintiff is moving under § 523(a)(2)(A), and the five substantive subsections of the FAC closely track the elements outlined above. Defendants appear to argue that the FAC must cite the applicable bankruptcy law, identify the appropriate elements and apply those elements to the facts alleged. This argument misrepresents the pleading standard. See, e.g., Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ("Rule 8 marks a notable and generous departure from the hypertechnical, code-pleading regiment of a prior era."). Even if Plaintiff had failed to mention § 523(a)(2)(A) within the body of the FAC, such an omission would not be fatal where the FAC’s subsections closely and precisely track the elements of the statute and where all parties and the Court are aware of the legal theory being articulated. See, e.g., McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir.
1996) ("[E]ven though a complaint is not defective for failure to designate the statute or other provision of law violated, the judge may in his discretion . . . require such detailed as may be appropriate in the particular case."). Here, Plaintiff has adequately identified a cognizable legal theory and has provided adequate factual allegations to support the pled theory. See Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2001) ("Dismissal is proper only where there is no cognizable legal theory or an absence of sufficient facts alleged to support a cognizable legal theory.").

Separately, as to the argument by Defendants that the Plaintiff has failed to adequately provide notice of which Defendant made the alleged misrepresentation, the Court concurs that ¶14 of the FAC does not adequately identify the Defendant and manner in which the representations were made to the Plaintiff.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, consistent with the Court’s prior rulings in the related Bastorous actions, the Court is incline to GRANT the Motion with leave to amend only as to the need for more specificity as to the circumstances surrounding the misrepresentations in accordance with FRCP 9(b).
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous

Party Information

Chapter 7
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
Plaintiff(s):
Mina Farah Represented By
Wayne W Suojanen Larry G Noe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)
1. by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Mina Farah against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18 Also #21

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Chapter 7

Defendants’ personal use.

Plaintiff contends he relied on the Defendants’ misrepresentations when offering the loan, and would not have offered a loan but for the false promises that the loan would be the senior lien. His numerous repayment demands in 2016 and 2017 were unsuccessful. Plaintiff further asserts that the Defendants made false representations in a similar manner to another lender, Mina Farah. Plaintiff asks for compensatory damages of a minimum of $300,000, and punitive damages in a minimum amount of

$600,000.

DISCUSSION

MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD

To avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
NON-DISCHARGEABILITY
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), a debt is not discharged for money obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud. The elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim are well-established: (1) a representation; (2) that the debtor knew was false; (3) that the debtor made with the intention of deceiving the creditor; (4) reliance on the representation by the creditor; (5) and damages as a proximate result of reliance on the representations. See, e.g., In re Eashai, 87 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 1996).

Here, the first sentence of the FAC indicates that the Plaintiff is moving under § 523(a)(2)(A), and the five substantive subsections of the FAC closely track the elements outlined above. Defendants appear to argue that the FAC must cite the applicable bankruptcy law, identify the appropriate elements and apply those elements to the facts alleged. This argument simply misrepresents the pleading standard. See, e.g., Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ("Rule 8 marks a notable and generous departure from the hypertechnical, code-pleading regiment of a prior era."). Even if Plaintiff had failed to mention § 523(a)(2)(A) within the body of the FAC, such an omission would not be fatal where the FAC’s subsections closely and precisely track the elements of the statute and where all parties and the Court are aware of the legal theory being articulated. See, e.g., McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 1996) ("[E]ven though a complaint is not defective for failure to designate the statute or other provision of law violated, the judge may in his
discretion . . . require such detailed as may be appropriate in the particular case."). Here, Plaintiff has adequately identified a cognizable legal theory and has provided adequate factual allegations to support the pled theory. See Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2001) ("Dismissal is proper only where there is no cognizable legal theory or an absence of sufficient facts alleged to support a cognizable legal theory.").

Separately, as to the argument by Defendants that the Plaintiff has failed to adequately provide notice of which Defendant made the alleged misrepresentation, the Court notes that ¶14 of the FAC appears to identify Defendant Bastorous as the party that made the misrepresentations. If this is the case, the FAC appears insufficient to state a claim against Defendant Shenouda.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, consistent with the Court’s prior rulings in the related
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Bastorous actions, the Court is incline to GRANT the Motion with leave to amend only as to the need for more specificity as to the circumstances surrounding the misrepresentations in accordance with FRCP 9(b) and to amend to state a claim against Shenouda if Plaintiff intends to maintain claim as against the joint debtor.
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
Plaintiff(s):
Anis Khalil Represented By
Wayne W Suojanen Larry G Noe
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#24.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)
1. by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18 Also #23

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

APPEARANCES REQUIRED

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#26.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01094. Complaint by Markus Anthony Boyd against U.S. BANK, SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC, Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 2 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 3 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 4 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 5 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 6 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 7 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint) Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Gebelt, Nicholas)

From: 6/26/18, 7/24/18, 7/25/18 Also #25

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/3/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

Defendant(s):

U.S. BANK Pro Se

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se

Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se

First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By

Erin M McCartney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

Plaintiff(s):

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01197 Itria Ventures, LLC v. Asif et al

#27.00 CONT Order to Show Cause As To Why Defendants Should Not Be Held In Contempt For Violation Of Court Order To Respond To Discovery

From: 8/29/18 EH

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By David T Egli

Zobia Asif Represented By

David T Egli

Joint Debtor(s):

Zobia Asif Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian

Plaintiff(s):

Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Malik Muhammad Asif

Michael F Chekian

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Thomas H Casey

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01129 Tarhuni v. Home Loan Investment Bank FSB et al

#1.00 OSC why adversary proceeding should not be dismissed Also #2

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Home Loan Investment Bank FSB Represented By

Angie M Marth

US Department of Hud Pro Se

Everett A Barton Jr Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12557

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01129 Tarhuni v. Home Loan Investment Bank FSB et al

#2.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint (Fee Not Required) by Melanie Tarhuni against Home Loan Investment Bank FSB , US Department of Hud , Everett A Barton Jr. Nature of Suit: 21 - Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property, 71 - Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay, 91 - Declaratory judgment

From: 8/23/18 Also #1

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Home Loan Investment Bank FSB Represented By

Angie M Marth

US Department of Hud Pro Se

Everett A Barton Jr Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-19250

Robert B Eppley

Chapter 13 #3.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc #43 for Sundee M Teeple Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.00

Also #4 EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Robert B Eppley Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Robert B Eppley Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-19250

Robert B Eppley

Chapter 13 #4.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc #93, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $350.00, Expenses: $0.00

Also #3 EH

Docket 98

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Robert B Eppley Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Robert B Eppley Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-28666

Mildred Goodridge Crawford

Chapter 13 #5.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc #219, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $350.00, Expenses: $0.00

Docket 229

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mildred Goodridge Crawford Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Mildred Goodridge Crawford Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-20002

Steven W Moll

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 8/23/18 EH

Docket 98

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Steven W Moll Represented By Gary J Holt

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-12404

Anthony E Turkson

Chapter 13 #7.00 Application for Compensation RE: Doc #120, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.00

Also #8 EH

Docket 129

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-12404

Anthony E Turkson

Chapter 13 #8.00 Application for Compensation RE: Doc #69, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.00

Also #7 EH

Docket 128

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-12849

Elsy G. Mejia

Chapter 13 #9.00 Motion for an Order Vacating the Dismissal of Case due to attorney error and to reinstate case pursuant to 11 U.S.C § 105 AND F.R.C.P 60(b)(l)

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Joint Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elsy G. Mejia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Movant(s):

Elsy G. Mejia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne James Geoffrey Beirne James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13 #10.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case Also #11

Docket 59

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13 #11.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 9/13/18 Also #10

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Movant(s):

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-20926

Mario Mondragon

Chapter 13 #12.00 Motion for Authority to Refinance Real Property EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mario Mondragon Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Mario Mondragon Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-13092

Debra J. Falcone and Charles W. Blackburn

Chapter 13 #13.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc#54, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $350.00, Expenses: $0.00

Docket 58

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debra J. Falcone Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Charles W. Blackburn Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Debra J. Falcone Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

Charles W. Blackburn Represented By Michael Smith Craig K Streed Sundee M Teeple

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Debra J. Falcone and Charles W. Blackburn

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-17861

Arturo Olvera

Chapter 13 #14.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Arturo Olvera Represented By William Radcliffe

Movant(s):

Arturo Olvera Represented By William Radcliffe William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11327

Latoya Joy Armstrong

Chapter 7 #15.00 CONT Order to show cause why John Alarcon should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §105 and F.R.B.P. 9020

From: 8/30/18 EH

Docket 20

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/17/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Latoya Joy Armstrong Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-10122

Lesley M Castle

Chapter 13 #16.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc #101, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $350.00, Expenses: $0.00

Docket 109

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lesley M Castle Represented By Michael Smith

Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Lesley M Castle Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Michael Smith

Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Dale Parham - INACTIVE - Sundee M Teeple

Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:13-18779

Rigoberto Baez

Chapter 13 #17.00 Application for Compensation Re: Doc #155, for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $350.00, Expenses: $0.00

Docket 160

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rigoberto Baez Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Movant(s):

Rigoberto Baez Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14388

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13 #18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jesus Pabloff Represented By

Tom A Moore

Joint Debtor(s):

Virginia Pabloff Represented By Tom A Moore

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14725

Percylyn Agustin Basa

Chapter 13 #19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 8/23/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Percylyn Agustin Basa Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15900

Adrio Soedarmo and Yolanda Soedarmo

Chapter 13 #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adrio Soedarmo Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Joint Debtor(s):

Yolanda Soedarmo Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15907

Antonio Anaya and Maria Anaya

Chapter 13 #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Antonio Anaya Represented By Jaime A Cuevas

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Anaya Represented By

Jaime A Cuevas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15909

Michael James Watts

Chapter 13 #22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael James Watts Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15944

Jeffrey Wayne Grieves and Brande Rae Grieves

Chapter 13 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeffrey Wayne Grieves Represented By Mona V Patel

Joint Debtor(s):

Brande Rae Grieves Represented By Mona V Patel

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15970

Incha K Lockhart

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Incha K Lockhart Represented By Kevin Tang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15972

Rafael Loyola

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/6/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rafael Loyola Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15977

John Arquillano and Janet Arquillano

Chapter 13 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John Arquillano Represented By Andrew Nguyen

Joint Debtor(s):

Janet Arquillano Represented By Andrew Nguyen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15985

David Vogel

Chapter 13 #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

David Vogel Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15987

Joseph Daniel Shubin

Chapter 13 #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

JoAnn Y. Wickham Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16098

Brianne Lucinda Pituley and Michele Diana Niehe Sharik

Chapter 13 #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Brianne Lucinda Pituley Represented By Steven A Alpert

Joint Debtor(s):

Michele Diana Niehe Sharik Pituley Represented By

Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16105

John David Kraus

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John David Kraus Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16117

Charlena Clark

Chapter 13 #37.00 Motion for Order for Levying Officer to Return Funds to Debtor Also #38

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Charlena Clark Represented By William Radcliffe

Movant(s):

Charlena Clark Represented By William Radcliffe William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16117

Charlena Clark

Chapter 13 #38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Also #37 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Charlena Clark Represented By William Radcliffe

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16135

Devon Boisvert and Jennifer Narita

Chapter 13 #39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Devon Boisvert Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Narita Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16141

Ignacio Diaz

Chapter 13 #40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ignacio Diaz Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16153

Shannon Williams

Chapter 13 #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Shannon Williams Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16155

John Ryan

Chapter 13 #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

John Ryan Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16158

Willie Mills Sanders, Jr.

Chapter 13 #43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Willie Mills Sanders Jr. Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16175

Jose F Mejia

Chapter 13 #44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16257

Jorge Luis Puerto and Diana Lazara Puerto

Chapter 13 #51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jorge Luis Puerto Represented By Michael E Clark

Joint Debtor(s):

Diana Lazara Puerto Represented By Michael E Clark

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16261

Joseph R. Hernandez

Chapter 13 #52.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joseph R. Hernandez Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16264

Robert Ray Schmidt, Jr. and Debbie Lynn Schmidt

Chapter 13 #53.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Robert Ray Schmidt Jr. Represented By Carey C Pickford

Coree Anne Apaez Represented By Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16552

Patrick Lovato

Chapter 13 #57.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Patrick Lovato Represented By Justin Lynch

Movant(s):

Patrick Lovato Represented By Justin Lynch Justin Lynch

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-11369

Robert Wayne Cook, Sr. and Kelly Danielle Cook

Chapter 13 #58.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case ( Delinquency) EH

Docket 152

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert Wayne Cook Sr. Represented By Steven A Alpert

Joint Debtor(s):

Kelly Danielle Cook Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-17491

Rosalie Estella Crouch

Chapter 13 #59.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/30/18, 9/13/18

Docket 91

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/26/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rosalie Estella Crouch Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-18156

Jose Luis Gutierrez and Patricia Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #60.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Luis Gutierrez Represented By Kelly Warren

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Gutierrez Represented By Kelly Warren

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-22637

Michelle Ann Maki

Chapter 13 #61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case

(Also opposing docket entry no. 69)

Docket 78

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-23150

Vivian Munson

Chapter 13 #62.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 8/30/18

Docket 225

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-11269

Brett R Bourbeau and Nicole S Bourbeau

Chapter 13 #63.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 48

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/20/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Brett R Bourbeau Represented By

H. Christopher Heritage

Joint Debtor(s):

Nicole S Bourbeau Represented By

H. Christopher Heritage

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-16637

Martin D Woods and Shante L Woods

Chapter 13 #64.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 94

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Martin D Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Shante L Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-20062

Lilia Ivethe Fong

Chapter 13 #65.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 9/13/18

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lilia Ivethe Fong Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-13030

Richard Hill Lindsay and Laura Lee Lindsay

Chapter 13 #66.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 109

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard Hill Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Joint Debtor(s):

Laura Lee Lindsay Represented By Emilia N McAfee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-17031

Anderson L Pepper

Chapter 13 #67.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 9/20/18

Also #68 EH

Docket 78

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-17031

Anderson L Pepper

Chapter 13 #68.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 8/23/18, 9/20/18

Also #67 EH

Docket 80

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anderson L Pepper Represented By Nancy Korompis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18125

Marc Meisenheimer

Chapter 13 #69.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Marc Meisenheimer Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18224

Anna Doreen Valles and Andy Valles, Jr.

Chapter 13 #70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 64

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anna Doreen Valles Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Joint Debtor(s):

Andy Valles Jr. Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-10082

Francisco R Palacios

Chapter 13 #71.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 157

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Francisco R Palacios Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-11790

Larry Patrick Egan and Elizabeth Ann Egan

Chapter 13 #72.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/13/18

Docket 51

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Larry Patrick Egan Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Elizabeth Ann Egan Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-13063

Ethel N Odimegwu

Chapter 13 #73.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18

Docket 100

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ethel N Odimegwu Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-13599

Maurice Frank Manceau

Chapter 13 #74.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 74

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/17/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Maurice Frank Manceau Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14187

Andre J Booker and Carrie L Booker

Chapter 13 #75.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/23/18

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Andre J Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Carrie L Booker Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14292

Lubna Shiraz Ahmed

Chapter 13 #76.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 59

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED

9/4/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lubna Shiraz Ahmed Represented By Joshua L Sternberg

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-15427

Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface

Chapter 13 #77.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 88

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron

Joint Debtor(s):

Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-15646

Elida Soto

Chapter 13 #78.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elida Soto Represented By

William G Cort

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-17589

Ryan Patrick McHugh and Jennifer Lynne McHugh

Chapter 13 #79.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20272

Jesus E. Montano and Nichole Montano

Chapter 13 #85.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/29/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jesus E. Montano Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Nichole Montano Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10170

Vernita Goodwin

Chapter 13 #86.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/13/18

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vernita Goodwin Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10209

Ertun Reshat and Hale Reshat

Chapter 13 #87.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 39

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ertun Reshat Represented By

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Amanuel Montrell Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders

Joint Debtor(s):

Katrina Lashall Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-11890

Rogelio Ramos and Maria Escobar

Chapter 13 #91.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Caleb Gervin Represented By

Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Ashley Gervin Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-13924

Sandra Lorena Parra

Chapter 13 #95.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sandra Lorena Parra Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-12949

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01153 Hutton v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al

#96.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding [First Amended Complaint] Also #97

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

09/27/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 10, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Lenton Hutton ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the Debtor’s estate on the petition date was certain real property located at 13370 Sea Gull Dr. in Victorville, CA. On the Petition Date, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells") held a Trustee’s sale of the Property.

On April 23, 2018, Wells filed a motion for relief from stay (the "RFS Motion"). On May 21, 2018, the Court denied the RFS Motion on the grounds that no stay was in effect in the case pursuant to § 362(c)(4) (the "RFS Order"). The record reflects that the Debtor did not seek reconsideration of the RFS Order, nor was the RFS Order appealed. On June 14, 2018, the bankruptcy case was dismissed following the confirmation hearing.

On May 17, 2018, the Debtor filed an action against Wells seeking damages and equitable relief based on various state law claims, in addition to two claims arising from the bankruptcy proceeding (the "Action"). On July 12, 2018, Wells removed the Action filed by the Debtor in State Court to the Bankruptcy Court.

On August 9, 2018, the Debtor filed an Amended Complaint (the "FAC"). On August 23, 2018, Wells filed the instant Motion to Dismiss the FAC ("Motion"). The Debtor filed Opposition to the Motion on September 7, 2018. Wells filed its reply to the Motion on September 13, 2018.

11:01 AM

CONT...

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

DISCUSSION

The Action appears premised primarily upon the incorrect assertion that Wells foreclosed in violation of the automatic stay. However, as set forth in the background section and as indicated on the Court’s Docket for the Main Case and, specifically, the RFS Order (of which the Court takes judicial notice), there was no stay when Wells foreclosed. The Debtor has not challenged the RFS Order either by seeking reconsideration or by appealing the order. Therefore, the Court is inclined to find that under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, the FAC must be dismissed as to the allegations alleging that a violation of the automatic stay occurred.

As to the remaining allegations going to state law claims regarding violations of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violation of the Business and Professions Code, Promissory Estoppel, and Violation of C.C.P. § 726, the Court finds as follows:

The dismissal of a bankruptcy case has several ramifications as set out in Bankruptcy Code Section 349. The Ninth Circuit has explained, "Section 349 of the Bankruptcy Code lists the various effects of dismissal of the underlying bankruptcy case; conspicuously absent from that list is automatic termination of jurisdiction of related cases." In re Carraher, 971 F.2d 327, 328 (9th Cir. 1992). The bankruptcy court may retain jurisdiction over a related proceeding subject to considerations of judicial economy, fairness, convenience and comity. In re Casamont Inv'rs, Ltd., 196 B.R. 517, 522 (9th Cir. BAP 1996).

Here, the Debtor’s underlying bankruptcy case was dismissed on June 14, 2018. The instant adversary proceeding is at its early stages. Given the Court’s tentative ruling that the Debtor is precluded from arguing that Wells foreclosed in violation of the automatic stay, the remaining allegations of the Debtor relate primarily to a determination of rights arising under state law, which are more appropriately raised in State Court and over which this Court cannot make final rulings pursuant to Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S. Ct. 2594, 180 L. Ed. 2d 475 (2011). Based on the foregoing, the Court has determined that the principles of judicial economy, fairness, convenience and comity do not favor this Court’s retention of jurisdiction over the action. Additionally, as an alternative grounds for dismissal, the Court incorporates the findings related to jurisdiction and finds that abstention is also appropriate as to the state law allegations and claims of the Debtor.

11:01 AM

CONT...

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DISMISS the FAC as to the Wrongful Foreclosure and Violation of the Stay claims, to the extent that these claims arise solely from the alleged violation of the automatic stay, and to REMAND the FAC to the State Court as to the remaining non-bankruptcy related issues both under a theory of declining jurisdiction and of absention.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lenton Hutton Represented By Christopher Hewitt Patricia Rodriguez

Defendant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

J. Barrett Marum

Clear Recon Corp. Pro Se

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se

Movant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

J. Barrett Marum

Plaintiff(s):

Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Patricia Rodriguez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:18-12949

Lenton Hutton

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01153 Hutton v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al

#97.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01153. Notice of Removal by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. by Lenton T. Hutton. Lynette)

From: 8/30/18 Also #96

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lenton Hutton Represented By Christopher Hewitt Patricia Rodriguez

Defendant(s):

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By

J. Barrett Marum

Clear Recon Corp. Pro Se

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Lenton T. Hutton Represented By Patricia Rodriguez

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Monday, October 1, 2018

Hearing Room

303

2:00 PM

6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11 #1.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case From: 9/25/18

Docket 37

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

Movant(s):

Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian

10:00 AM

6:15-14652

Donald Ray Eskridge

Chapter 13 #1.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14798 Ladybird Lane, Victorville, CA 92394

MOVANT: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC

From: 6/20/18, 7/24/18, 8/21/18 EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Donald Ray Eskridge Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

PennyMac Loan Services, LLC Represented By John D Schlotter

Karrollanne K Cayce Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-18702

Frank Munoz and Nanci Jessie Munoz

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3334 Antler Rd., Ontario, CA 91761-0329

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Docket 45

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frank Munoz Represented By

Alon Darvish

Joint Debtor(s):

Nanci Jessie Munoz Represented By Alon Darvish

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-13982

Clarice Morris

Chapter 13 #3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6924 Grand Vacations Way, Orlando, FL 32821

MOVANT: HILTON RESORTS CORPORATION

Docket 68

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Clarice Morris Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Hilton Resorts Corporation Represented By Thomas R Mulally

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-20372

Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson

Chapter 13 #4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Hyundai Sonata, VIN: 5NPE24AF9FH130462

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/18

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anna C. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

George E. Hopson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Jennifer H Wang

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Anna C. Hopson and George E. Hopson

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12189

Keely J Barrett

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 45645 Jaguar Way, Temecula, CA 92592

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Docket 26

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Keely J Barrett Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1156 Sheila Court, Upland, CA 91784

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 9/4/18 EH

Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:

9/4/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darlene C Vigil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12782

Justa Nelida Guzman

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3527 N. Bronson St. San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

From: 9/4/18 EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Justa Nelida Guzman Represented By Lionel E Giron

Movant(s):

The Bank of New York Mellon, et al Represented By

S Renee Sawyer Blume

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13924

Sandra Lorena Parra

Chapter 13 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 44670 San Clemente Cir, Palm Desert, CA 92260-3526

MOVANT: WILLMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY FSB dba CHRISTIANA TRUST

CASE DISMISSED 9/27/18

Docket 39

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Debtor’s case was dismissed on September 27, 2018. Debtor filed opposition to the Motion but did not address the assertion by Movant that the case was filed in bad faith with evidence of two prior cases which the Court’s records reflect were both dismissed for failure by Debtor to make plan payments. Based on the evidence, coupled with the recent dismissal of the instant case for failure to make plan payments, the Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(4).

GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. The remaining requests for relief are DENIED as moot based on the dismissal of the case.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sandra Lorena Parra Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By

Jamie D Hanawalt

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Sandra Lorena Parra

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14278

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13 #9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Scion XB

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: YES

Parties to indicate whether there has been progress on an agreement for an APO. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Bruce Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Tina Marie Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16821

Frederick Hale Powers

Chapter 7 #10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Avalon

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/18

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Frederick Hale Powers Represented By

Linda Roberts-Ross

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By

Austin P Nagel

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17169

Richard M Bolter and Shantell V Bolter

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Carson Trailer Fun Runner

MOVANT: ALTURA CREDIT UNION

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard M Bolter Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Shantell V Bolter Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Altura Credit Union Represented By Brian T Harvey

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Richard M Bolter and Shantell V Bolter

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17502

Shaun Besci

Chapter 13 #12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 18991 Roberts Rd (RV) Riverside CA 92508

MOVANT: THE DAVID J. ROGALIA AND PENNY L. ROGALIA JOINT LIVING TRUST, PENNY L. ROGALIA TRUSTEE

Docket 8

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Shaun Besci Pro Se

Movant(s):

The David J Rogalia and Penny L Represented By

Barry L O'Connor

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17597

David Meisland

Chapter 13 #13.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 26818 Montseratt Court, Murietta, CA 92563

MOVANT: DAVID MEISLAND

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

The Debtor’s proposed plan indicates a good faith attempt to address the reasons for dismissal of the prior case. Service was proper. No opposition was filed. Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Meisland Represented By Nima S Vokshori

Movant(s):

David Meisland Represented By Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17624

Jose Antonio Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13 #14.00 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1931 Hammingway Pl, San Jacinto CA 92583

MOVANT: JOSE VELASCO & LILIAN MICAELA VELASCO

From: 9/17/18 EH

Docket 12

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/1/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Antonio Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai

Movant(s):

Jose Antonio Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai Danny K Agai

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17735

Carlos Garcia

Chapter 13 #15.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 480 Bryn Mawr Ct.,Colton CA 92324-1405

MOVANT: CARLOS GARCIA

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

Debtor’s efforts to address the issues which cause dismissal in the prior case, as detailed in the Debtor’s declaration, provide clear and convincing evidence that overcomes the presumption that the Debtor’s case was not filed in good faith. For these reasons, including the lack of opposition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #16.00 Motion to Continue Hearing On Patient Care Ombudsman's Emergency Motion For Order Approving Review Of Confidential Patient Records Under §333, And Approving Notice To Patients Under Bankruptcy Rule 2015.1(b)

Also #17 EH

Docket 106

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 9/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Jerry Seelig Represented By

Sara Chenetz

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #17.00 Patient Care Ombudsman's Emergency Motion for Order Approving Review of Confidential Patient Records Under § 333, and Approving Notice to Patients Under Bankruptcy Rule 2015.1(b)

Also #16 EH

Docket 75

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Jerry Seelig Represented By
Sara Chenetz
2:00 PM
6:18-17533

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11

#18.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
1. Requiring Status Report EH
  Docket 0
  
  Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt
10:00 AM
6:18-14061

Jennifer Monique Devore-Garcia

Chapter 7

#1.00 CONT Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and American Honda Finance Corporation re 2017 Honda Civic

From: 9/12/18 EH
Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jennifer Monique Devore-Garcia Represented By
Daniel King
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15767

Reva Mae Scott

Chapter 7

#2.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA LLC re 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350W

From: 9/12/18 EH
Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Reva Mae Scott Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-11025

James Freeman and Darnetta Smith-Freeman

Chapter 7

#3.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
10/3/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 1,153.25 Trustee Expenses: $ 30.80

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Freeman Represented By Robert W Ripley
Joint Debtor(s):
Darnetta Smith-Freeman Represented By Robert W Ripley
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

#4.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 1 filed by Milligan Beswick Levine & Knox, LLP as Not Allowable Against the Estate

From: 8/22/18 EH
Docket 98
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/19/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By
Gaurav Datta
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:18-17065

Jose Peralta-Velasquez, Jr

Chapter 7

#5.00 Motion By United States Trustee To Dismiss Case With A Filing Bar EH
Docket 7
Tentative Ruling:
10/3/18
BACKGROUND
On August 21, 2018, Jose Peralta-Velasquez ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Debtor had previously filed three bankruptcies in the previous fifteen months, all of which were dismissed for failure to file information. On September 6, 2018, UST filed a motion to dismiss case, requesting a one-year re-filing bar.
DISCUSSION
1. Dismissal
  
  11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1) permits the Court to dismiss a Chapter 7 case for abuse. 11 U.S.C.
  § 707(b)(3)(A) states:
  1. In considering under paragraph (1) whether the granting of relief would be an abuse of the provisions of this chapter in a case in which the presumption in
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Jose Peralta-Velasquez, Jr
  paragraph (2)(A)(i) does not arise or is rebutted, the court shall consider –
  (A) whether the debtor filed the petition in bad faith
  
  Chapter 7
  
  In determining whether a case should be dismissed under § 707(b)(3)(A), the Court considers the totality of the circumstances, but is ultimately instructed to consider whether "the debtor’s intention in filing a bankruptcy petition is inconsistent with the Chapter 7 goals of providing a ‘fresh start’ to debtors and maximizing the return to creditors." In re Mitchell, 357 B.R. 142, 154-55 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2006) (listing factors to be considered in making that determination).
  
  The majority of the Mitchell factors are inapplicable when, as here, a debtor files a skeletal petition that does not provide the Court with sufficient information to apply the Mitchell test. Only factor seven (history of bankruptcy filings) and, possibly, factor nine (egregious behavior) can be assessed when a debtor files a skeletal petition. Both those factors weigh in favor of dismissal when, as here, a debtor repeatedly files skeletal petitions during a short period of time, and does not disclose previous filings.1 While § 707(a)(1) and (3) provide for dismissal when a debtor fails to fulfill his duties under the Bankruptcy Code, when a debtor repeatedly files bankruptcy and fails to evince any attempt to comply with the filing requirements, it can be inferred, absent any indication to the contrary, that the debtor’s purpose in filing bankruptcy is not to take advantage of the fresh start. See, e.g., In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648, 655 (Bankr.
  N.D. Cal. 2007) ("Courts generally hold that when a debtor repeatedly files bankruptcy petitions and then repeatedly fails to file schedules or to comply with other requirements, this pattern of behavior is evidence of bad faith and an attempt to abuse the system."). Dismissal under § 707(b)(3) is appropriate in those circumstances.
2. Re-Filing Bar
The court is empowered to impose a refiling bar under 11 U.S.C. § 349(a). As
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jose Peralta-Velasquez, Jr

Chapter 7
COLLIER notes, courts’ analysis of this section is somewhat confused due to confounding "dismissal with prejudice" with "dismissal with injunction against future filings." COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 349.02[3]; compare In re Garcia, 479 B.R. 488 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2012) (denying motion for dismissal with prejudice, but imposing three-year refiling bar) with In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2007) (appearing to equate dismissal with prejudice with an injunction against refiling).

There is also a circuit split concerning whether an injunction on refiling for more than 180 days is allowed under the Bankruptcy Code. Compare In re Frieouf, 938 F.2d 1099 (10th Cir. 1991) (180 days is maximum allowed length of refiling injunction) with Casse v. Key Bank Nat. Ass’n, 198 F.3d 327 (2nd Cir. 1999) (injunction against filing for more than 180 days permissible). 11 U.S.C. § 349(a) reads:

Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise, the dismissal of a case under this title does not bar the discharge, in a later case under this title, of debts that were dischargeable in the case dismissed; nor does the dismissal of a case under this title prejudice the debtor with regard to the filing of a subsequent petition under this title, except as provided in section 109(g) of this title.

The disagreement revolves around whether the qualifier "Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise" modifies the content after the semi-colon. In re Leavitt noted this disagreement, but since the court was dealing with a dismissal with prejudice, rather than an injunction against refiling, it did not resolve the issue. 209 B.R. 935, 942 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997). Within the Ninth Circuit, it appears the trend is to adopt the reasoning of the Second Circuit and allow injunctions for more than 180 days. See e.g. In re Velasques, 2012 WL 8255582 at *3 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2012).

Here, Debtor has filed three skeletal bankruptcies in the previous fifteen months and failed to file the balance of the required case commencement documents in the instant case As noted above, the Court has determined that Debtor’s behavior is sufficient to warrant dismissal for bad faith and the Court finds the requested one year refiling bar to be appropriate.

Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose is deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jose Peralta-Velasquez, Jr

Chapter 7
TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose Peralta-Velasquez Jr Pro Se
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Mohammad Tehrani
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#6.00 CONT Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:13-bk-27611 with 6:15-ap-01307- MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only

From: 9/26/18 EH
Docket 88
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/13/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#7.00 CONT Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248 with 6:15-ap-01307- MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 [Amended] for Discovery Purposes Only

From: 9/26/18 EH
Docket 77
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/13/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay Franklin R Fraley Jr

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01199 Revere Financial Corporation v. Bank of Southern California, N.A.

#8.00 CONT Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248-MH with 6:15-
ap-01307-MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only From: 9/26/18
EH

Docket 99
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/13/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Bank of Southern California, N.A. Represented By
Kathryn M.S. Catherwood
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay Franklin R Fraley Jr

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#9.00 CONT Motion to Consolidate Lead Case 6:14-ap-01248-MH with 6:15-
ap-01307-MH ; 6:16-ap-01163-MH; 6:16-ap-01199 for Discovery Purposes Only From: 9/26/18
EH

Docket 121
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/13/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Jerry Wang Represented By
Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
A. Cisneros Represented By
Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01197 Itria Ventures, LLC v. Asif et al

#10.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:17-ap-01197. Complaint by Itria Ventures, LLC against Malik Muhammad Asif, Zobia Asif. Fee Amount $350 Complaint Objecting To Dischargeability of Debt Nature of Suit: (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud))

From: 11/15/17, 12/6/17, 1/10/18, 6/6/18 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By David T Egli
Zobia Asif Represented By
David T Egli
Joint Debtor(s):
Zobia Asif Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Thomas H Casey
2:00 PM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01100 Zamucen & Curren LLP v. Johnson

#11.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01100. Complaint by Zamucen & Curren LLP against Vance Zachary Johnson . (d),(e)))

From: 7/31/18 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Defendant(s):
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider
Plaintiff(s):
Zamucen & Curren LLP Represented By Patricia J Grace
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#12.00 CONT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss The Amended Adversary Complaint Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) and Fed. R. Bank. P

From: 7/24/18, 7/25/18, 9/26/18 Also #13
EH

Docket 11
Tentative Ruling:
10/03/18
The Debtor’s FAC is premised on the assumption that the Consent Judgment required BOFA and its successors to extinguish the second lien on his principal residence. However, while the Debtor asserts he is not seeking enforcement of the Consent Judgment, in order to maintain a claim under § 544 (b)(1) or §§ 28 U.S.C. 3301-3308, the Debtor must demonstrate, at a minimum, that the Consent Judgment required BOFA to release his second mortgage. The FAC thus sets forth the provisions of the Consent Judgment which he believes establish that his second mortgage should have been extinguished. (FAC at pp. 6-7, subheading C. The Terms of the Judgment). Whether or not the Debtor seeks enforcement of the Consent Judgment, its provisions and conditions must be interpreted for the Debtor to prevail.

Here, a quick examination of the Consent Judgment reveals several hurdles as it pertains to the Debtor’s claims: first, the language of the Consent Judgment which purportedly resulted in a ‘transfer’ of the Debtor’s property is found under the ‘Consumer Relief’ provisions of the Consent Judgment. However, a plain reading of ¶ 5 of the Consent Judgment indicates that BOFA was required to provide up to "$7,626,200,000 of relief to consumers who meet eligibility criteria… and
$948,000,000 of refinancing relief." This provision calls into question the Debtor’s assumption that his second mortgage was required to be extinguished pursuant to the Consent Judgment when read alongside the language of page 169, part 2.c.i., which states, in pertinent part, "Servicer agrees that it must write down second liens consistent with the following program until its Consumer Relief Requirement credits are fulfilled." The Court gleans from these provisions that as to the Consumer Relief
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
Requirements, not all second liens having met the criteria of part 2.c.i.2.a. were required to be extinguished as part of the Consent Judgment. Instead, the Consent Judgment provides which kinds of second liens were eligible for relief and placed a minimum dollar amount of relief that BOFA was required to meet. However, it appears that so long as BOFA met the stated dollar amount of required consumer relief, BOFA would have been in compliance with the Consent Judgment.
In sum, the Court agrees with Defendants that to prevail, the Debtor must establish that BOFA was required to release the lien pursuant to the Consent Judgment. Absent such a finding, the Debtor cannot be said to have been parted from property pursuant to § 101(54) (defining "transfer"). Having failed to aver in the FAC "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," the Court finds that the FAC must be dismissed. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550
U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). Specifically, the Court finds that Debtor has failed to plead sufficient facts underpinning the existence of a transfer to allege a cognizable legal theory.
Finally, although the Court need not reach this issue today, the Court questions whether a request to make findings that the Consent Judgment would have required BOFA to extinguish the second lien amounts to "enforcement" such that exclusive jurisdiction lies with the District Court for the District of Columbia.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and DISMISS the FAC without leave to amend. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

07/25/2018

Moving Defendant leads the analysis astray by conflating issues of standing to enforce the Consent Judgment with the question of standing of a Debtor-in-possession to prosecute a fraudulent conveyance action under § 548. However, that misdirection is rendered irrelevant once the focus shifts to the § 548 elements outlined in Plaintiff's opposition, and in particular on the glaring, inescapable conclusion that Plaintiff has failed to allege facts to support that a transfer occurred -- an essential element of a Section 548 cause of action.
2:00 PM
CONT... Markus Anthony Boyd Chapter 11
Here the facts at issue pertain to the Defendants' alleged failure to act (at
some point, although the Court is unclear of the basis for Plaintiff's allegation of a specific date for the transfer) to release or extinguish a junior lien against Debtor's property. But no specific affirmative act, or transfer of possession or ownership is alleged to have occurred. See Bernard v. Sheaffer (In re Bernard), 96 F.3d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1996) ("'[A] transfer is a disposition of an interest in property. The definition is as broad as possible. … Under this definition, any transfer of an interest in property is a transfer, including a transfer of possession, custody, or control even if there is no transfer of title, because possession, custody, and control are interests in property.") (citations omitted); Greenspan v. Orick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (In re Brobeck, Phleger & Harrision LLP), 408 B.R. 318, 338 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2009) ("Within the confines of these general principles, the general rule is that "[t]he hallmark of a 'transfer' is a change in the rights of the transferor with respect to the property after the transaction."); In re Feiler, 218 B.R. 957, 960 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1998), aff'd, 230 B.R.
164 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1999), aff'd, 218 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2000) ("Within the context of a fraudulent transfer, the definition of transfer is sufficiently broad to include a transfer that results in a modification of form or value of property transferred or a deposit into or withdrawal from a bank account.") (citations omitted); Kapila v. U.S. (In re Taylor), 386 B.R. 361, 369 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.2008) (debtor's waiver of an NOL carryback constitutes a transfer).

Here, Plaintiff simply hasn't alleged any change of rights in property after any particular transaction, nor has Plaintiff otherwise presented any authority for its proposition that the Defendants' failure to release the lien somehow constitutes a transfer. Basically, it appears here that what the estate MAY have is a right to enforce the Consent Judgment so as to compel extinguishment of the junior lien. But that question is not before the Court, and the Court takes no position on whether it is a viable cause of action or if the Debtor even has standing to prosecute it. For that reason, the Court is inclined to find that the Plaintiff has failed to state an actionable claim under the bankruptcy code, and therefore the Amended Complaint should be dismissed.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Nicholas W Gebelt

Chapter 11
Defendant(s):
U.S. BANK Pro Se
SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se
Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se
First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Movant(s):
First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Plaintiff(s):
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
2:00 PM
6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01094 Boyd v. U.S. BANK et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01094. Complaint by Markus Anthony Boyd against U.S. BANK, SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC, Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 2 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 3 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 4 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 5 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 6 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint # 7 Exhibit Exhibits to Complaint) Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Gebelt, Nicholas)

From: 6/26/18, 7/24/18, 7/25/18, 9/26/18 Also #12
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
Defendant(s):
U.S. BANK Pro Se
SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Pro Se
Series 2007-FFC First Franklin Pro Se
First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, Represented By
Erin M McCartney
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
Plaintiff(s):
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
8:30 AM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#1.00 Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Emergency Motion for Order (a) Prohibiting Utilities From Altering, Refusing, or Discontinuing Service; and (b) Deeming Utilities Adequate Assured of Future Performance Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 366

Also #2 EH
Docket 2
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
8:30 AM
6:18-18339
Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi
Chapter 11
#2.00 Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Notice of Motion and Emergency Motion for (a) Order Approving Stipulation for Interim Use of Cash Collateral; (b) Granting of Adequate Protection; (c) Granting Related Relief
Also #1 EH
Docket 3
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794
ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:17-01286 ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation et a v. Gotte Electric, Inc. et

#1.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01286. Complaint by ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation, Another Meridian Company, LLC, Inland Machinery, Inc. against Gotte Electric, Inc., Insurance Company Of The West, Employment Development Department, Trico-Savi Business Park, L.P., a California limited partnership, Angela Denise McKnight, Steven Schonder, Western Alliance Bank, an Arizona corporation, United states of america, Carlin Law Group APC, Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Washington corporation, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. (Charge To Estate - $350.00).
Complaint in Interpleader Nature of Suit: (02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy))) (Bastian, James)
Trico-Savi Business Park L.P. - Dismissed 12/28/17
Western Alliance Bank, dba Torrey Pines Bank - Dismissed 2/1/18 Gotte Electric, Inc - Dismissed 3/14/18
Ledcor Construction Inc - Dismissed 3/26/18

From: 2/27/18 EH
Docket 1
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Defendant(s):
Gotte Electric, Inc. Pro Se Insurance Company Of The West Represented By
Jennifer Leland
David B Shemano
2:00 PM
CONT...

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
Howard J Weg

Chapter 11
Employment Development Represented By
Elisa B Wolfe-Donato
Angela Denise McKnight Pro Se
Steven Schonder Pro Se
United states of america Represented By Charles Parker
Carlin Law Group APC Represented By Kevin R Carlin
Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Represented By Daniel P Scholz
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#2.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Inland Machinery, Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18

Also # EH
Docket 630
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794
ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
Chapter 11

#3.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re ASR Constructors Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18

Also # EH
Docket 630
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794
ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
Chapter 11

#4.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Another Meridian Company LLC

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18

Also # EH
Docket 630
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:16-14273
Allied Injury Management, Inc.
Chapter 11
#5.00 CONT Application for Compensation of Final Fees and/or Expenses with proof of service for Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/11/2016 to 12/5/2016, Fee: $278,079.00, Expenses: $4,603.13
From: 12/19/17, 4/24/18 EH
Docket 306
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Movant(s):
Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-19993
B & B Family, Incorporated
Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01116 Forte v. B & B Family, Incorporated
#6.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01116. Complaint by Patricia Forte against B & B Family, Incorporated
From: 7/24/18, 7/31/18 EH
Docket 1
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/16/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Party Information
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Defendant(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Patricia Forte Represented By
D Edward Hays Laila Masud
2:00 PM
6:13-16964

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#1.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment/Memorandum of Points and Authorities on the Preclusive Effect of Plaintiff's State Court Judgment

From: 7/18/18, 7/31/18 Also #2
EH

Docket 208

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
Defendant(s):
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
Movant(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-16964

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:13-01171 Schrader v. Sangha

#2.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:13-ap-01171. Complaint by Charles Edward Schrader against Narinder Sangha . willful and malicious injury HOLDING DATE

From: 7/8/15, 11/4/15, 3/2/16, 12/14/16, 12/13/17, 4/5/17, 6/7/17, 7/12/17, 8/2/17, 9/27/17, 10/4/17, 11/1/17, 12/6/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 3/21/18, 6/20/18,
7/18/18, 7/31/18

Also #1 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
02/28/2018

This hearing is vacated. The Status Conference is CONTINUED to March 21, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. The Court has provided notice to the parties of the continuance.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi
Defendant(s):
Narinder Sangha Represented By Deepalie M Joshi Ryan F Thomas
2:00 PM
CONT...

Narinder Sangha

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Charles Edward Schrader Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-29922

Nancy Ann Howell

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell

#3.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment
(Holding Date)

From: 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17, 1/24/18, 1/31/18, 5/30/18

Also #4 EH
Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
Movant(s):
Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
Andrew S Bisom
Plaintiff(s):
Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
Andrew S Bisom
Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Nancy Ann Howell

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-29922

Nancy Ann Howell

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01070 Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom et al v. Howell

#4.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01070. Complaint by Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom, Eisenberg Law Firm, APC against Nancy Ann Howell. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))

From: 5/14/14, 7/2/14, 12/10/14, 3/18/15, 4/22/15, 5/20/15, 7/22/15, 10/28/15, 12/2/15, 2/17/16, 3/2/16, 3/16/16, 4/27/16, 9/21/16, 12/14/16, 6/21/17, 1/24/18,
1/31/18, 5/30/18

Also #3 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Nancy Ann Howell Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Law Office of Andrew S. Bisom Represented By
Andrew S Bisom
Eisenberg Law Firm, APC Represented By Andrew S Bisom
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nancy Ann Howell

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#5.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment From: 7/25/18
Also #6 EH
Docket 54
Tentative Ruling:

10/10/2018

This hearing on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment was continued from July 25, 2018. At the prior hearing, the Court continued the hearing for the Plaintiff and Defendant to have an opportunity to address the issue of willfulness under § 523(a)(6) in accordance with the Ninth Circuit BAP’s decision in In re Arden, 2015 WL 4068962, at *9 (9th Cir. BAP 2015)(citing Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert Oliker, 47 Cal.3d 863, 871–72 (1989)).

PERSONAL SERVICE

The Defendant/Debtor again argues that under California law, issue preclusion is not available unless the defendant "has been personally served with summons or has actual knowledge of the existence of the litigation." (Docket 176 at 6). In support, the Debtor cites to In re Williams' Estate (Williams), 36 Cal. 2d 289, 297, 223 P.2d 248, 254 (1950), which was in turn cited with approval by In re Harmon, 250 F.3d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 2001). These cases, however, underscore that in order to limit the principle of collateral estoppel, there must be a "complete lack of knowledge on the part of a defendant of the action". Id. (emphasis added). In its prior tentative ruling, the Court noted that the failure of the Debtor’s declaration to address when or whether
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
he had knowledge of the litigation that resulted in the default judgment was fatal. Now, having had the opportunity to file a new declaration, the Debtor still fails to address this issue instead reiterating that he was out of the country when the Plaintiff tried to effectuate service on him. The Plaintiff had previously indicated that due to the failure to locate the Debtor, that the Debtor was served via publication in the prior action and in response, the Debtor asserted that the failure of the Plaintiff to provide evidence of an order permitting service by publication should be determinative.
However, in reply, the Plaintiff has now provided a copy of the State Court’s Order for Publication. (Docket 177, at Ex. 1). Based on the foregoing evidence that Debtor was properly served by publication and, in particular due to Defendant/Debtor’s failure to address the issue of whether he had "complete lack of knowledge" of the State Court litigation, the Court finds that the Plaintiff’s objection that collateral estoppel should not apply to the instant case is overruled. Finally, the Debtor’s related arguments that the State Court Default Judgment is void as a matter of law for denying the Debtor due process are found to be unpersuasive.

WILLFULLNESS

"A ‘willful’ injury is a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Barboza, 545 F.3d at 706, quoting Kawaauhau
v. Geiger, 523 U .S. 57, 61 (1998). To satisfy the willfulness requirement, it must be shown that the debtor either had "a subjective intent to harm or a subjective belief that harm is substantially certain." Su, 290 F.3d at 1144. When determining the debtor's intent under § 523(a)(6), there is a presumption that the debtor knows the natural consequences of his actions. Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206.

As a threshold matter, the Court overrules the Debtor’s objections to the declaration of the Deborah Slaieh.

As to the issue of "willfulness", the Court finds the Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief persuasive. (Docket No. 175). In particular, the Supplemental Brief points to the specific allegations that the Debtor intended to injure the Plaintiff by filing litigation against him. The State Court Complaint contained numerous allegations that Debtor’s actions were "carried out in a deliberate, callous, malicious, despicable and intentional manner in order to injure and damage him." Additionally, the record before the trial
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
court contained declaration from both the Plaintiff and Debtor’s ex-wife which supported a finding that the primary purpose behind the filing of the litigation was to injure the Plaintiff. Here, the Court finds that the State Court necessarily awarded punitive damages based on the Debtor’s intent to injure the Plaintiff and infers such intent to injure from a finding that the actor committed malice in fact based on the facts in the record detailed above, in addition to the facts set forth in the Plaintiff’s filings in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has met the requirements to satisfy California’s requirements for application of collateral estoppel on the issue of "intent to injure", and on that basis, the Court finds that the Default Judgment against the Debtor is determinative on the issue of willfulness under § 523(a)(6).

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the Court’s prior tentative ruling, in addition to the instant tentative ruling, and having considered the arguments and filings of the parties, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has established that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 18, 2013, Nabeel Slaieh ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. On March 24, 2014, W E Jon Albrecht ("Plaintiff") filed the instant complaint to determine dischargeability of debt pursuant to § 523(a)(6). On June 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed his Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion"). On July 3, 2018, the Debtor filed his opposition to the Motion ("Opposition"). On the same date, the Debtor filed a substitution of attorney by which the Debtor indicated his intent to represent himself in propria persona going forward.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh
As a threshold matter, the Court must address the manner in which the

Chapter 7
Opposition was filed. Prior to the filing of the Substitution of Attorney Form, the Debtor was represented by George Saba ("Saba"). However, per the State Bar of California website, Mr. Saba has not been eligible to practice law in California since December 2017. Pursuant to the Court’s manual, Section 3.1(c) and Section 3.2(b), attorneys admitted to practice in the Central District of California, currently in good standing, are eligible to register as CM/ECF users with the rights to log in and file documents. Here, the Debtor, acting in pro per, is not eligible to file documents using CM/ECF and it was improper for Mr. Saba to use the CM/ECF system to improperly file a document for a party who he is no longer representing and who he is no longer able to represent given his ineligibility to practice law. Further, Section 3.2(d)(1) prohibits a registered user from knowingly permitting or causing to permit his or her login and password to be utilized by anyone. Here, Mr. Saba has violated the Court’s rules regarding CM/ECF filing. Based on the improper filing of the Opposition, the Court is inclined to issue an OSC why Mr. Saba’s CM/ECF rights should not be suspended or cancelled pursuant to Section 3.2(d)(3) of the Court Manual.

Based on the foregoing, the Court strikes the Opposition as improperly filed. A reply to the Opposition was filed on July 11, 2018 ("Reply"), as well as separately filed objections to the Declaration of Defendant in support of the Opposition (Docket No. 172).

DISCUSSION

Summary Judgment

A court may grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. FRBP 7056 (incorporating FRCP 56). In determining whether to grant a motion for summary judgment, courts must view the record and all inferences drawn from it in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Trunk v. City of San Diego, 629 F.3d 1099, 1105 (9th Cir.2011).
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Judicial Notice

In support of the Motion, Plaintiff requests that this Court take judicial notice of (1) The Certified Copy of Complaint for Malicious Prosecution, RJN, Ex. 1, (2) the Certified Copy of Summons filed January 25, 2011, RJN, Ex. 2, (3) the Certified Copy of Proof of Service of Summons, RJN, Ex. 3, and (4) the Copy of Judgment, RJN, Ex. 4. The Court takes judicial notice of these filings.

Nondischargeability under § 523(a)(6)

Section 523(a)(6) excepts from discharge debts arising from a debtor's willful and malicious injury to another person. Barboza v. New Form, Inc. (In re Barboza), 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir.2008). The willful and malice requirements must be analyzed separately, Carillo v. Su (In re Su), 290 F.3d 1140, 1146–47 (2002), and the court must determine that both have been met, Ormsby v. First Am. Title Co. of Nev. (In re Ormsby), 591 F.3d 1199, 1206 (9th Cir. 2010).

"A ‘willful’ injury is a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Barboza, 545 F.3d at 706, quoting Kawaauhau
v. Geiger, 523 U .S. 57, 61 (1998). To satisfy the willfulness requirement, it must be shown that the debtor either had "a subjective intent to harm or a subjective belief that harm is substantially certain." Su, 290 F.3d at 1144. When determining the debtor's intent under § 523(a)(6), there is a presumption that the debtor knows the natural consequences of his actions. Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206.

"A malicious injury involves ‘(1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse.’ " Su, 290 F.3d at 1146–47, quoting Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich), 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir.2001). "Within the plain meaning of this definition, it is the wrongful act that must be committed intentionally rather than the injury itself." Jett v. Sicroff (In re Sicroff), 401 F.3d 1101, 1106 (9th Cir.2005), citing Murray v. Bammer (In re Bammer), 131 F.3d 788, 791 (9th Cir.1997)("This four-part definition does not require a showing of biblical malice, i.e., personal hatred, spite, or ill will. Nor does it require a showing of an intent to injure, but rather it requires only an intentional act which causes injury."). "Malice may be inferred based on the nature of the wrongful act."
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206, citing Transamerica Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Littleton (In re Littleton), 942 F.2d 551, 554 (9th Cir.1991)(determining that, in the case of conversion, malice may be inferred).

In the instant action, the Plaintiff obtained a judgment ("Judgment) in State Court as against the Defendant based on a complaint for malicious prosecution (the "State Action"). The Plaintiff now moves under a theory of collateral estoppel for summary judgment finding that the Judgment is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6).

Collateral Estoppel

A bankruptcy court may grant summary judgment based on the issue preclusive effect of an existing state court judgment. See Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001). In doing so, it must apply the forum state's issue preclusion law. Id. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Here, California preclusion law applies.

In California, issue preclusion bars relitigation of an issue when: 1) the issue sought to be precluded is identical to that decided in a prior proceeding; 2) the issue was actually litigated in the prior proceeding; 3) the issue was necessarily decided in the prior proceeding; and 4) the decision in the prior proceeding is final and on the merits. Lucido v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 335, 341 (1990). Additionally, in California, issue preclusion may only be applied if it furthers underlying public policies. See id. at 343.

The party asserting issue preclusion bears the burden of establishing these requirements. Id. at 341. To do so, "[the] party must produce a record sufficient to reveal the controlling facts and pinpoint the exact issues litigated in the prior action. Any reasonable doubt as to what was decided by a prior judgment should be resolved against allowing [issue preclusive] effect." Kelly v. Okoye (In re Kelly), 182 B.R. 255, 258 (9th Cir.BAP1995), aff'd, 100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir.1996).

Here, the Plaintiff obtained a Judgment on a malicious prosecution action under California law. The Court now turns to whether ‘malicious prosecution’ satisfies the requirements for collateral estoppel under California law.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

Application of law to cause of action for malicious prosecution

In California, the common law tort of malicious prosecution provides a remedy for individuals subjected to maliciously instituted criminal and civil proceedings. In re Arden, 2015 WL 4068962, at *9 (9th Cir. BAP 2015)(citing Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert Oliker, 47 Cal.3d 863, 871–72 (1989)). To establish a cause of action for malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding, the plaintiff must show "that the prior action (1) was commenced [or continued] by or at the direction of the defendant and was pursued to a legal termination in his [or her], plaintiff's, favor;
(2) was brought without probable cause; and (3) was initiated [or continued] with malice." Id., quoting Bertero v. Nat'l Gen. Corp., 13 Cal.3d 43, 50 (1974)(internal quotation marks omitted).

In Arden, the BAP specifically considered whether the tort of malicious prosecution satisfies both the willful and malicious prongs of § 523(a)(6):

"The ‘malice’ element of the malicious prosecution tort relates to the subjective intent or purpose with which the defendant acted in initiating the prior action." Estate of C. Delores Tucker v. Interscope Records, Inc., 515 F.3d 1019, 1030 (9th Cir.2008) ("Tucker"), quoting Sheldon Appel Co., 47 Cal.3d at 874 (internal quotation marks omitted). However, the malice required in malicious prosecution "is not limited to actual hostility or ill will toward [the] plaintiff but exists when the proceedings are instituted primarily for an improper purpose." Albertson v. Raboff, 46 Cal.2d 375, 383 (Cal.1956). See also Tucker, 515 F.3d at 1030, quoting Sierra Club Found. v. Graham, 72 Cal.App. 4th 1135, 1147 (1999)("Sierra Club ").

The California Supreme Court has explained:

[T]he principal situations in which the civil proceedings are initiated for an improper purpose are those in which (1) the person instituting them does not believe that his claim may be held valid; (2) the proceedings are begun primarily because of hostility or ill will; (3) the proceedings are initiated solely for
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh
the purpose of depriving the person against whom they are instituted of a beneficial use of his property; [or] (4) the proceedings are initiated for the purpose of forcing a settlement which has no relation to the merits of the claim.

Albertson, 46 Cal.2d at 383, quoting Rest., Torts § 676. Accordingly, in a malicious prosecution action, the proof may or may not establish a willful intent to injure on the part of the defendant.

Chapter 7

Arden at *9-10.

As underscored in Arden, willfulness is not a separate and distinct element of the tort of malicious prosecution, though willfulness may be inferred from the debtor's intent in commencing or continuing litigation. Moreover, " ‘[m]erely because a tort is classified as intentional does not mean that any injury caused by the tortfeasor is willful.’ " Ditto v. McCurdy, 510 F.3d 1070, 1078 (9th Cir.2007), quoting Miller v.
J.D. Abrams Inc. (In re Miller), 156 F.3d 598, 604 (5th Cir.1998). Here, the Judgment obtained against Defendant/Debtor was a default judgment and although the BAP found that ‘malicious prosecution’ likely satisfies the malice requirement under § 523(a)(6), it also specifically found that the ‘willfulness’ element was not necessarily decided by the state court because ‘willfullness’ is not required to enter judgment on a malicious prosecution cause of action. In Arden, the jury instructions indicated that the specific question of intent to injure was not posed to the jury. As such, the willfulness requirement was not necessarily decided or actually litigated by the state court. Similarly, the Judgment obtained by Plaintiff Albrecht did not require the State Court to consider, let alone determine whether Defendant Slaieh intended injury to Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s Motion assumes the issue of intent was decided by the State Court. However, absent authority to distinguish the Arden case, whose reasoning this Court adopts as its own, the Motion does not satisfy the requirements for collateral estoppel because the Judgment is insufficient to establish the elements required under
§ 523(a)(6). It is possible that the issue of willfulness is subsumed by the state court’s determination that punitive damages were appropriate. However, such a theory must be addressed with reference to the Ninth Circuit BAP’s decision in In re Plyam that a California state court punitive damage award, standing alone, does not preclude relitigation of § 523(a)(6)'s "willful" intent requirement. In re Sangha, 678 F. App'x
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
561, 562 (9th Cir. 2017); Plyam v. Precision Development, LLC (In re Plyam), 530
B.R. 456, 463–65 (9th Cir. BAP 2015) (holding that "under California law, the general definition of malice in fact encompasses less reprehensible states of mind" than § 523(a)(6)'s "willful" intent requirement).

Finally, although the Court has stricken the Opposition as improperly filed, the Court shall also address the one cognizable legal issue raised in the Opposition – namely, that the State Action Complaint was not personally served on him. As to this issue, the Court agrees with the Plaintiff that the Defendant’s declaration fails to address whether and when he learned of the State Action. The declaration of Defendant is conspicuously silent on these facts and as such determined to be not credible on the issue of lack of service.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for additional briefing regarding the issue of "willfulness".

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Nabeel Slaieh Represented By
George A Saba - INACTIVE -
Defendant(s):
Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice
Movant(s):
Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Bruce A Boice

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By
D Edward Hays David Wood Matthew Grimshaw
2:00 PM
6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#6.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01081. Complaint by
W.E. Jon Albrecht against Nabeel Slaieh. willful and malicious injury))
HOLDING DATE

From: 10/19/16, 12/14/16, 2/15/17, 3/29/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17, 4/25/18, 7/25/18

Also #5 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nabeel Slaieh Represented By
George A Saba - INACTIVE -
Defendant(s):
Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice
Plaintiff(s):
W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By
D Edward Hays
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

David Wood Matthew Grimshaw

Chapter 7
1:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#1.00 CONT Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Notice of Motion and Emergency Motion for (a) Order Approving Stipulation for Interim Use of Cash Collateral; (b) Granting of Adequate Protection; (c) Granting Related Relief

From: 10/5/18 Also #2
EH

Docket 3
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
1:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#2.00 Motion for Order: (1) Approving the Sale of Substantially All of the Assets of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 363(b)(1); (2) Approving the Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts; and (3)
Granting Related Relief
(FINAL HEARING)

Also #1 EH
Docket 8
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
10:00 AM
6:14-18349

Fabiola Adame

Chapter 13

#1.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 795 West Arrow Highway, Upland, CA 91786

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA N.A.

EH

Docket 180

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of adequate protection discussions, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Fabiola Adame Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Movant(s):
HSBC BANK USA Represented By Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:14-19029

Sheila Marie Dejesa

Chapter 13

#2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 8366 Forest Park Street, Chino, CA 91708-0000

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 87

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sheila Marie Dejesa Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association, not Represented By
Angie M Marth Erin M McCartney
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Sheila Marie Dejesa

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-10048

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13

#3.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3300 Mary Ellen Dr, Riverside, California 92509-0816

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

From: 5/15/18, 6/26/18, 8/1/18, 8/21/18 EH
Docket 66
Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
5/15/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court regarding extent of arrears and status of adequate protection discussions, if any.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Margaret Crain Represented By Yelena Gurevich
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt Jessica L Carter
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Margaret Crain

Tavon Taylor

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-12609

Ryan J. Watson

Chapter 13

#4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6484 Lorena Avenue, Mira Loma, CA 91752

MOVANT: PROVIDENT SAVINGS BANK

EH

Docket 41
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ryan J. Watson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Movant(s):
Provident Savings Bank Represented By John A Boyd
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-10082

Francisco R Palacios

Chapter 13

#5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 23856 Citrus Avenue, Perris, California 92570

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 163
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Francisco R Palacios Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Matthew R. Clark III Keith Labell
Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-14619

Candice Maria Borrego

Chapter 13

#6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 33455 Brand St Lake Elsinore, CA 92530

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

EH

Docket 46
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Candice Maria Borrego Represented By Andy C Warshaw
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15893

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Cruze, VIN 1G1BE5SM3G7250074

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC

From: 9/25/18 EH
Docket 36
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 10:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joseph Manuel Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts
Joint Debtor(s):
Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

Chapter 13
Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19291

Carolyn Maxine Bodden

Chapter 13

#8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: for property located at 370 Claremont St Hemet, CA 92545

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carolyn Maxine Bodden Represented By Edward G Topolski
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20487

Ann Marie Smith

Chapter 13

#9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6140 Sard St, Alta Loma, CA 91701

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

EH

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT relief from § 1301(a) co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ann Marie Smith Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee Jonetta A Graves
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-13172

Michelle Cadena Quinn

Chapter 13

#10.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3656 N. Valley Court, San Bernardino, CA 92407

MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

From: 6/13/18, 8/28/18, 9/11/18 EH
Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert
Movant(s):
Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15624

Hugo Perez

Chapter 7

#11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1860 Bel Air Street, Corona, California 92881

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Noting that Debtor has failed to file an opposition to the instant motion, which the Court deems consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), the Court is inclined to GRANT the relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Hugo Perez Pro Se
Movant(s):
THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15680

Ryan Yance Bradley and Jessica Lee Bradley

Chapter 7

#12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Chevrolet Sonic, VIN 1G1JC5SBXE4155221

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ryan Yance Bradley Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Joint Debtor(s):
Jessica Lee Bradley Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Ryan Yance Bradley and Jessica Lee Bradley
Sheryl K Ith

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16081

Rachael Dene Thomas

Chapter 7

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Chrysler 200 VIN 1C3CCBB9DN763064

MOVANT: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rachael Dene Thomas Pro Se
Movant(s):
SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Represented By
Paul V Reza
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16642

Juan A Flores Rodriguez and Jocelyn Chavez

Chapter 7

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Chevrolet Impala LT Sedan 4D

MOVANT: BALBOA THRIFT & LOAN

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT annulment of the automatic stay retroactive to the petition date as to Movant. GRANT request under ¶
2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Juan A Flores Rodriguez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Jocelyn Chavez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
Balboa Thrift & Loan Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Juan A Flores Rodriguez and Jocelyn Chavez
Keith E Herron

Chapter 7
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16798

Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton

Chapter 7

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2007 Lexus RX350, VIN 2T2GK31U97C019668

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES INC.

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Renard Louis Hamilton Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Regina Elizabeth Hamilton Pro Se
Movant(s):
Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16826

Leo Peter Benitez and Kathryn Jewell Benitez

Chapter 7

#16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2008 Ford Expedition, VIN 1FMFU15538LA18295

MOVANT: PARTNERS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)(2) because the evidence submitted by Movant indicates that there is equity in the property.
GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Leo Peter Benitez Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Kathryn Jewell Benitez Represented By Todd L Turoci
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Leo Peter Benitez and Kathryn Jewell Benitez

Chapter 7
Partners Federal Credit Union Represented By Yuri Voronin
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16905

Tina M Coca

Chapter 7

#17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2345 Cornell Circle, Corona, CA
92881-6625

MOVANT: FIRST MIDWEST BANK

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Tina M Coca Represented By
Emilia N McAfee
Movant(s):
First Midwest Bank, its successors Represented By
Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17006

Juan Alvarado and Maria Susana Guzman

Chapter 7

#18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3523 Fillmore St., Riverside, CA 92503

MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST N.A.

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Juan Alvarado Represented By Bernal P Ojeda
Joint Debtor(s):
Maria Susana Guzman Represented By Bernal P Ojeda
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for Represented By
Christina J O
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Juan Alvarado and Maria Susana Guzman

Chapter 7
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17041

Hank William Romine

Chapter 7

#19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ford F150, VIN 1FTEW1EG3GFD20453

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Hank William Romine Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17060

Julisa V Martinez

Chapter 7

#20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Scion FR-S

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
1. and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Julisa V Martinez Represented By William Radcliffe
  Movant(s):
  Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
  Austin P Nagel
  Trustee(s):
  John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-17258
  
  Harold Lundy and Clare Ann Lundy
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 28942 Via La Espalda, Murrieta, CA
  
  MOVANT: POSITIVE INVESTMENT INC.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  10/16/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court notes that the request for relief section of the motion [Dkt. No. 11, pg. 5] does not actually request relief from the automatic stay. Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY requests under ¶¶ 2 and 6 as premature.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Harold Lundy Pro Se
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Clare Ann Lundy Pro Se
  Movant(s):
  Positive Investment, Inc. Represented By Helen G Long
  Trustee(s):
  Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-17323
  
  Keith T. Marshall and Sonia M. Marshall
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #22.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Dodge Ram, VIN 1C6RD6FT8CS267760
  
  MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.
  
  EH
  
  Docket 8
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  10/16/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court notes that rather than attach the appropriate exhibits, it appears that Movant has inadvertently replaced those exhibits with a second copy of the motion. As a result, Movant has failed to establish that it has a security interest in the subject property nor has Movant established the fair market value of the property. Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Keith T. Marshall Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sonia M. Marshall Represented By Christopher J Langley
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Movant(s):
  
  Keith T. Marshall and Sonia M. Marshall
  
  Chapter 7
  Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
  Trustee(s):
  Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-17631
  
  Luis E. Sanchez and Martha J. Amaro De Sanchez
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #23.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Ford Edge, VIN 2FMPK4AP6HBB74639
  
  MOVANT: CAB WEST LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 11
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  10/16/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Luis E. Sanchez Represented By William E Windham
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Martha J. Amaro De Sanchez Represented By William E Windham
  Movant(s):
  Cab West LLC Represented By
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Trustee(s):
  
  Luis E. Sanchez and Martha J. Amaro De Sanchez
  Sheryl K Ith
  
  Chapter 7
  Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-17883
  
  Norberto Calalay Jimenez and Araceli Corrales Jimenez
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #24.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property
  
  MOVANT: NORBERTO CALALAY JIMENEZ AND ARACELI CORRALES JIMENEZ
  
  EH
  
  Docket 10
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  10/16/2018
  
  The Court is inclined to DENY the motion. Debtors’ previous case was dismissed for failure to make pre-confirmation plan payments. The instant motion does not address the cause for dismissal or identify any change in financial circumstances in order to overcome the presumption of bad faith arising under § 362(c)(3)(C).
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Norberto Calalay Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Araceli Corrales Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Movant(s):
  Norberto Calalay Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
  Araceli Corrales Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Norberto Calalay Jimenez and Araceli Corrales Jimenez
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-17886
  
  Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 11 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 1657 Via Verde Drive Rialto, CA 92377 SAN BERNARDINO . filed by Debtor Ricky Antonio Scott, Joint Debtor Shemida Shiloni Scott)
  
  MOVANT: RICKY ANTONIO SCOTT AND SHEMIDA SHILONI SCOTT
  
  From: 9/25/18 EH
  Docket 14
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  09/25/2018
  
  The Debtors’ prior case was dismissed on July 25, 2018, for failure to submit 2017 federal and state tax returns to the Trustee. The Debtors and their counsel did not appear at the hearing and the case was dismissed. The Debtors have obtained new counsel. In support of their Motion, they assert that they believed they had complied with the Trustee’s request for the returns by submitting Debtor Husband’s returns but failed to notify the Trustee that the co-debtor was not required to file taxes.
  Additionally, the Debtors assert that because their plan proposed a 100% payout to creditors, they were not require to provide refund monies to the estate.
  
  Here the Debtors request that their stay be continued as to the foreclosing creditor, Wells Fargo, who has a sale scheduled for September 26, 2018.
  
  The Debtors have provided sufficient evidence to overcome the § 362(c)(3)(C) presumption that the case was not filed in good faith given that a relief from stay was pending in the prior case as to Wells Fargo when the case was dismissed.
  
  Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to Wells
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott
  
  Chapter 13
  Fargo, the foreclosing creditor.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
  Movant(s):
  Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
  Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:13-25794
  
  ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
  
  Chapter 11
  Adv#: 6:17-01286 ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation et a v. Insurance Company
  
  #26.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01286. Complaint by ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation, Another Meridian Company, LLC, Inland Machinery, Inc. against Gotte Electric, Inc., Insurance Company Of The West, Employment Development Department, Trico-Savi Business Park, L.P., a California limited partnership, Angela Denise McKnight, Steven Schonder, Western Alliance Bank, an Arizona corporation, United states of america, Carlin Law Group APC, Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Washington corporation, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. (Charge To Estate - $350.00).
  Complaint in Interpleader Nature of Suit: (02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy))) (Bastian, James)
  Trico-Savi Business Park L.P. - Dismissed 12/28/17
  Western Alliance Bank, dba Torrey Pines Bank - Dismissed 2/1/18 Gotte Electric, Inc - Dismissed 3/14/18
  Ledcor Construction Inc - Dismissed 3/26/18
  
  From: 2/27/18, 10/9/18 EH
  Docket 1
  
  Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Defendant(s):
Insurance Company Of The West Represented By
Jennifer Leland
2:00 PM
CONT...

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
David B Shemano Howard J Weg

Chapter 11
Employment Development Represented By
Elisa B Wolfe-Donato
Angela Denise McKnight Pro Se
Steven Schonder Pro Se
United states of america Represented By Charles Parker Najah J Shariff
Carlin Law Group APC Represented By Kevin R Carlin
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#27.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Inland Machinery, Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18

Also #28 & 29 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#28.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Another Meridian Company LLC

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18

Also #27 & #29 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#29.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re ASR Constructors Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18

Also #27 & 28 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

#30.00 CONT Application for Compensation of Final Fees and/or Expenses with proof of service for Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/11/2016 to 12/5/2016, Fee: $278,079.00, Expenses: $4,603.13

From: 12/19/17, 4/24/18, 10/9/16 EH
Docket 306

Tentative Ruling:
On May 11, 2016, Allied Injury Management, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On June 6, 2016, the Court approved the employment application of Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP to serve as counsel to Debtor ("Applicant"). On November 17, 2016, the Court approved an application to expand the scope of Applicant’s representation. On November 30, 2018, the Court ordered the appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee and, five days later, David Goodrich was appointed as the Chapter 11 Trustee.

On October 6, 2017, Applicant filed an application for compensation for an aggregate amount of $282,682.13 covering the period of May 11, 2016 to December 5, 2016. Applicant and UST have twice stipulated to a continuance of the hearing.

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1), the court may award reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services. The court has an independent duty to review the fee application in the absence of objections. See 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(2). The court "will not indulge in extensive labor and guesswork to justify a fee for an attorney who has not done so himself." In re Taylor, 66 B.R. 390 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1986).

11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. These factors include time spent, rates charged, necessity of the service, reasonableness of the service, expertise of attorney, and comparable market rates.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

First of all, the Court notes that Applicant’s fee application is somewhat unclear. The application requests $278,079 for professional fees related to the main bankruptcy case and three adversary proceeding, and a summary identifying the amount of fees in each proceeding is provided on the tables that spans pages 6 and 7 of the fee application. That tables identifies fees in the amount of $242,270.50 in the main case. Nevertheless, the very next table, which deals with categories of tasks performed and spans pages 7-8 of the fee application, only identifies
$227,244.50 in fees for the main case. It does not appear that the fee application addresses or explains this discrepancy of $15,026, and, therefore, the Court is inclined to reduce the fee application by $15,026.

The "Summary of Fees for the Main Case" table is additionally problematic because of the fact that the majority of the rows and tables in this summary do not add up to the identified total. While the miscalculations are not egregious, and are sometimes to the disadvantage of Applicant, the errors force put the credibility of the fee application as a whole, including its more than 100 pages of billing entries, into question. The inherent contradictions of the fee application continue when comparing the summary tables with the more detailed tables in the application’s sections on the adversary matters.

Additionally, the Court notes that the first two pages of Exhibit 4 include billing for services provided which predate the effective date of the employment order. Those billing entries related to services provided by Mr. Lieberman are also lumped entries. For those two reasons, the Court is inclined to reduce the fee application by an additional amount of $6,068.

Otherwise, the Court has reviewed the fee application and finds the requested fees and costs to be generally reasonable. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing for Counsel to file an amended application correcting the arithmetical errors and apparent contradictions throughout the fee application.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
2:00 PM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Movant(s):
Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-19993

B & B Family, Incorporated

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01116 Forte v. B & B Family, Incorporated

#31.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01116. Complaint by Patricia Forte against B & B Family, Incorporated

From: 7/24/18, 7/31/18, 10/9/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Defendant(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Patricia Forte Represented By
D Edward Hays Laila Masud
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#32.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/21/18 EH
Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#33.00 Application for Compensation and Notice of Hearing with Proof of Service for Todd L Turoci, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/2/2017 to 9/17/2018, Fee:
$164280.00, Expenses: $7207.77. (Turoci, Todd) EH
Docket 414
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 10/30/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
2:00 PM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#34.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Application Of Glassratner Advisory & Capital Group LLC, Financial Assistants To The CRO Of The Debtor, For Compensation And Reimbursement Of Expenses

Also #35 & #36 EH
Docket 297
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO JUDGE YUN'S CALENDAR FOR 11/1/18 AT 1:30 P.M. IN CTRM 302
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
Movant(s):
GlassRatner Advisory & Capital Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#35.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Application Of Winthrop Couchot Golubow Hollander, LLP, General Insolvency Counsel For The Debtor, For Compensation And Reimbursement Of Expenses

Also #34 & #36 EH
Docket 292
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO JUDGE YUN'S CALENDAR FOR 10/18/18 AT 1:30 P.M. IN CTRM 302
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
Movant(s):
Winthrop Couchot Golubow Represented By Robert E Opera Richard H Golubow Andrew B Levin
2:00 PM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#36.00 Application for Compensation First And Final Application Of Troutman Sanders LLP, Serving as Special Corporate Counsel For The Debtor and Debtor in Possession, For Compensation And Reimbursement Of Expenses

Also #34 & #35 EH
Docket 295
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO JUDGE YUN'S CALENDAR FOR 11/1/18 AT 1:30 P.M. IN CTRM 302
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
Movant(s):
Troutman Sanders LLP Represented By Robert E Opera
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#37.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Payment of PrePetition Payroll Obligations; and (2) Authorizing Debtor to Honor PrePetition Employment Procedures
(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18 Also #38 & #39
EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#38.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Continuation of Utility Service and Approval of Adequate Assurance of Payment to Utility Company Under Section 366(b) , Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Ch 11 Case for Order Authorizing Debtor to Provide Adequate Assurance of Payment to Utility Service Providers (11 U.S.C. Sec. 366)
(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18 Also #37 & #39
EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#39.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Debtors to Use Cash Collateral on Interim Basis; (2) Granting Adequate Protection to Secured Creditors; and (3) Scheduling a Final Hearing
(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18 Also #37 & #38
EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich
3:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi and

Chapter 11

#40.00 CONT Motion for Order: (1) Approving the Sale of Substantially All of the Assets of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 363(b)(1);
1. Approving the Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts; and (3)
Granting Related Relief
(FINAL HEARING)

From: 10/15/18 Also #41
EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
3:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi and

Chapter 11

#41.00 CONT Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Notice of Motion and Emergency Motion for (a) Order Approving Stipulation for Interim Use of Cash Collateral; (b) Granting of Adequate Protection; (c) Granting Related Relief

From: 10/5/18, 10/15/18 Also #40
EH

Docket 3

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
10:00 AM
6:18-16968

Ashley R Smith and Justin C Smith

Chapter 7

#1.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Bank of America, N.A. re 2013 Dodge Avenger

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ashley R Smith Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Justin C Smith Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16515

Mark Stephen Shuttlesworth

Chapter 7

#2.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Ally Bank re 2015 Jeep Cherokee

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Stephen Shuttlesworth Represented By Michael E Clark
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15550

Richard Anthony Moreno

Chapter 7

#3.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and American Honda Finance Corporation re 2014 Honda Accord

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Anthony Moreno Represented By Michael E Clark
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14982

Audrey Yasui-Iwata

Chapter 7

#4.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and wescom central credit union re 2014 Nissan Rogue

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Audrey Yasui-Iwata Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14971

Raul Zamora

Chapter 7

#5.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Harley-Davidson Credit Corp re 2014 Harley-Davidson FLHXS Street Glide

Also #6 EH
Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Raul Zamora Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14971

Raul Zamora

Chapter 7

#6.00 Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Harley-Davidson Credit Corp re 2016 Harley-Davidson FXDF - 103 DTBA Fat Bob

Also #5 EH
Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Raul Zamora Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-19680

Christina Suzanna Faris Pena and Hector Pena

Chapter 7 #7.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

10/17/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Final Report of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 2,781 Trustee Expenses: $ 129.54

The TFR is approved and the trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christina Suzanna Faris Pena Represented By Dina Farhat

Joint Debtor(s):

Hector Pena Represented By

Dina Farhat

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Christina Suzanna Faris Pena and Hector Pena

Chapter 7

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-16872

William Redfield Barlow, III and Lindsay Marie Barlow

Chapter 7 #8.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the Application of the associated professional, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees:	$ 3,533.69
Trustee Expenses:	$ 98.74
Attorney Fees:	$10,190
Attorney Costs:	$394.24

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Redfield Barlow III Represented By Michael E Clark Heather J Canning

11:00 AM

CONT...

William Redfield Barlow, III and Lindsay Marie Barlow

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Lindsay Marie Barlow Represented By Michael E Clark Heather J Canning

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Julie Philippi Todd L Turoci

11:00 AM

6:15-20226

Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.

Chapter 7 #9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 164

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/18

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

Trustee Fees:	$ 27,771.40
Attorney Fees:	$45,196.88
Attorney Costs:	$2,322.45
Accountant Fees:	$2,572

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ann Lee Eid-Brooks Represented By Vincent Renda

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ann Lee Eid-Brooks and Darrell Edward Brooks, Jr.

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Darrell Edward Brooks Jr. Represented By Vincent Renda

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Caroline Djang

11:00 AM

6:18-15911

Rogelio Hernandez Delgado

Chapter 7 #10.00 Motion to Reconsider Dismissal of Case EH

Docket 20

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/18

BACKGROUND

On July 16, 2018, Rogelio Delgado ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. The case was dismissed on September 17, 2018, after the Debtor failed to file pay stubs required under Section 521(a)(1)(B)(iv). On September 24, 2018, the Debtor filed his Motion to Reconsider Dismissal.

The Debtor filed the deficient document on September 24, 2018. Prior to the dismissal, the Trustee had filed on August 23, 2018, a Report of No Distribution indicating the case is a no asset case.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rogelio Hernandez Delgado Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Movant(s):

Rogelio Hernandez Delgado Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rogelio Hernandez Delgado

Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte Robert G Uriarte

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7 #11.00 Motion to Dismiss Bankruptcy Case Also #12

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 13, 2018, Desert Ice Castle, LLC ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 7 relief. Steven Speier is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The Debtor’s Managing Member and alleged sole owner is Anthony Liu ("Liu"). The petition indicated that the Debtor owned assets totaling $1,864.61 and had liabilities totaling $860,500. The Debtor listed two claimants in Schedule F, one claim of Andrzej Luczynski ("Luczynski") in the amount of $800,000 (as disputed) and a claim of Lui Bin in the amount of $60,500. On September 12, 2018, Luczynski filed Claim No 1-1 in the amount of $3,200,000 based on a State Court Action for "unlawful termination [of] joint venture; conversion; unlawful eviction". Luczynski has further indicated that a trial date for the State Court Action is set for November 2, 2018. The Docket reflects that a Motion to Disallow Claim No. 1 has been set for hearing on October 24, 2018.

On September 10, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy ("Motion"). A notice of Non-opposition was filed by Lui Bin on the same date.

Opposition to the Motion was filed by Luczynski and the Trustee on October 3, 2018 (the "Oppositions"). The Debtor filed an Omnibus Reply to the Oppositions on October 10, 2018 ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

The Debtor seeks dismissal pursuant to § 305(a)(1). Section 305(a)(1)

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

provides as follows:

The court, after notice and a hearing, may dismiss a case under this title, or may suspend all proceedings in a case under this title, at any time if—

the interests of creditors and the debtor would be better served by such dismissal or suspension;
11 U.S.C. § 305(a)(1); In re Eastman, 188 B.R. 621, 625 (9th Cir. BAP 1995). The
courts that have construed § 305(a)(1) are in general agreement that abstention in a properly filed bankruptcy case is an extraordinary remedy, and that dismissal is appropriate under § 305(a)(1) only in the situation where the court finds that both "creditors and the debtor" would be "better served" by a dismissal. Id. (internal citations omitted). The legislative history uses the following example of such a situation:

an arrangement is being worked out by creditors and the debtor out of court, there is no prejudice to the rights of creditors in that arrangement, and an involuntary case has been commenced by a few recalcitrant creditors to provide a basis for future threats to extract full payment.
H.R.Rep. No. 95–595, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 325 (1977); 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963,
6281.
As the statutory language and legislative history demonstrate, the test under § 305(a) is not whether dismissal would give rise to a substantial prejudice to the debtor. Nor is the test whether a balancing process favors dismissal. Rather, the test is whether both the debtor and the creditors would be "better served" by a dismissal.

In support of the Motion, the Debtor argues that (1) Luczynski will suffer no prejudice from dismissal of the case because the amended complaint filed in the State Action dismissed the Debtor from the complaint; (2) Creditor Lui Bin will be paid in full; (3) the only parties benefitting from continuation of the case are the Trustee and his professionals. Although the Debtor has seemingly been dismissed from the underlying State Court litigation, the State Action retains allegations that the Debtor is an alter ego of the named defendant, Liu. (Roman Decl. ¶ 2).

The Oppositions essentially assert that (1) Luczynski has filed a proof of claim that constitutes prima facie evidence of a claim; and (2) avoidable insider payments
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7
have been discovered that will benefit the Debtor’s creditors.
On the current record, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. Here, assuming (as the Court must at this juncture) that Luczynski may have an enforceable claim against the Debtor’s estate, dismissal is likely to result in plain legal prejudice to Luczynski because the Debtor and its principal/sole shareholder seek to payoff the only other unsecured creditor in full in order to force a dismissal. The Debtor’s strategy is a transparent violation of the bankruptcy code’s command that similarly situated creditors must be treated similarly. Additionally, the Court is unconvinced that the dismissal of the Debtor from the underlying State Court Action is a sufficient basis to find that the Debtor has no remaining liability to Luczynski. In fact, the Debtor’s evidence confirms that Luczynski’s complaint continues to argue that the Debtor and Liu are alter egos. For now, the Court agrees with the Trustee and Luczynski that dismissal would be premature at this point.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Debtor has not met its burden of demonstrating that both the Debtor and creditors will be "better served" by dismissal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Movant(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7
11:00 AM
6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

#12.00 CONT Motion to Compel Debtor's and Counsel's Appearance at Continued 11
U.S.C. § 341(a) Meeting of Creditors From: 9/26/18
Also #11 EH
Docket 42
Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 13, 2018, Desert Ice Castle, LLC ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 7 relief. Steven Speier is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The Debtor’s Managing Member and alleged sole owner is Anthony Liu ("Liu"). The petition indicated that the Debtor owned assets totaling $1,864.61 and had liabilities totaling $860,500. The Debtor listed two claimants in Schedule F, one claim of Andrzej Luczynski ("Luczynski") in the amount of $800,000 (as disputed) and a claim of Lui Bin in the amount of $60,500. On September 12, 2018, Luczynski filed Claim No 1-1 in the amount of $3,200,000 based on a State Court Action for "unlawful termination [of] joint venture; conversion; unlawful eviction". Luczynski has further indicated that a trial date for the State Court Action is set for November 2, 2018. The Docket reflects that a Motion to Disallow Claim No. 1 has been set for hearing on October 24, 2018.

On August 23, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion to Compel Debtor and Counsel’s Appearance at Continued 341(a) Meeting of Creditors ("Motion"). The Motion details Liu and the Debtor’s Counsel’s failures to appear at 6 separate scheduled 341(a) meetings of creditors, including failing to appear at the initial meeting. (Speier Decl. ¶¶3-8). The Debtor filed an Opposition to the Motion on September 12, 2018. In the Opposition, the Debtor asserts that negotiations and "informal" meetings with Karl Anderson wherein the Debtor provided numerous documents to the Trustee through Mr. Anderson serve to demonstrate that the Debtor
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7
has been cooperating with the Trustee. The Trustee filed his Reply on September 19, 2018.

DISCUSSION

The language of § 343 is clear that the Debtor "shall submit to examination under oath at the meeting of creditors." The Trustee’s declaration in Reply to the Opposition indicates that he specifically told Liu and his Counsel that their attendance at the 341(a) was mandatory. Absent evidence that they were formally excused from appearance at the 341(a) meeting of creditors, the Debtor’s evidence is inapposite.
Informal cooperation does not obviate the code’s requirement that the Debtor submit to questioning under oath at a scheduled 341(a) meeting of creditors. The Stoddard declaration’s recitation of interactions with Mr. Anderson are unavailing. It is nowhere indicated that Mr. Anderson was ever directly asked by Counsel for the Debtor whether the discussions obviated the need to attend the 341(a) meetings of creditors. The Debtor appears to be under the misconception that a formal command of some kind was required. No such demand is required. The statute is clear that attendance is mandatory and the Debtor does not dispute that notice of the 341(a) meetings of creditors were received. The Debtor’s failure to address this requirement of the code is inexcusable.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Movant(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
6:17-16272

Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez

Chapter 7

#13.00 Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) - No Fee EH
Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:
10/17/2018
BACKGROUND
On July 27, 2017, Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. Todd Frealy is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee").
Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 1475 Capri Lane in San Jacinto, CA 92583. (the "Property").

On September 17, 2018, the Trustee filed his Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) ("Motion").

Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION
Sale of Estate Property Pursuant to Section 363(b)
The trustee, after notice and a hearing, may sell property of the estate. 11
U.S.C. § 363(b)(1); see also Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub, 471
U.S. 343, 352 (1985). The sale must be in the best interests of the estate and the price must be fair and reasonable. In re Canyon Partnership, 55 B.R. 520 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1985); see also In re Wilde Horse Enterprises, Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991)(sale must have fair/reasonable price, accurate/reasonable notice to creditors and sale made in good faith). The trustee must articulate some "business justification" for selling estate property out of the "ordinary course of business" before the court may approve the transaction. In re Lionel Corp., 722 F.2d 1063, 1071 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Ernst Home Ctr., Inc., 209 B.R. 974, 979 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1997). Objections to sale that are based on inadequacy of price are often resolved the court ordering an auction, which may occur in open court. Simantrob v. Claims Prosecutor,
11:00 AM
CONT...

Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez

Chapter 7
LLC (In re Lahijani), 325 B.R. 282, 287 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 6004(f).1

The Trustee seeks an order authorizing him to sell the Property to Right Solutions LLC ("Buyer"), or in the alternative, to the highest bidder at the hearing on the Motion. The Trustee indicates that the Property is subject to property tax liens totaling $2,664, $130,000 in favor of Carrington Mortgage Services, and $10,000 in favor of the Law Office of Curtis R. Aijala. The Motion proposes that all liens will be paid off from escrow. The Trustee’s analysis indicates that after payment of liens on the Property and deducting closing costs, including broker’s commissions, the net proceeds for the estate is estimated to be $68,106 based on a proposed sales price of
$229,000. Claims totaling $17,198.63 have been filed in the case. Based on these figures, the sale should enable the Trustee to pay allowed claims in full. The Court finds that the trustee’s proposed sale is in the best interests of the estate and the price is fair and reasonable.
1. Bidding Procedures
  
  Generally, bidding procedures must be untainted by self-dealing, encourage bidding and be fair/reasonable/serve the best interests of the estate. See In re Crown Corp., 679 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1982). Here, the Trustee has proposed bidding procedures which require an initial overbid of $10,000 above the proposed purchase price of $229,000, with each additional bid in increments of $5,000, and a deposit of
  $23,900 provided to the Trustee 7 days prior to the sale. The Trustee’s proposed bidding procedures are reasonable, under the circumstances, and are therefore approved.
2. Sale Made in Good Faith
The proposed sale has been brought in good faith and has been negotiated on an "arms- length" basis. The court, in Wilde Horse Enterprises, set forth the factors in
11:00 AM
CONT...

Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez

Chapter 7
considering whether a transaction is in good faith. The court stated:

‘Good faith’ encompasses fair value, and further speaks to the integrity of the transaction. Typical ‘bad faith’ or misconduct, would include collusion between the seller and buyer, or any attempt to take unfair advantage of other potential purchasers. And, with respect to making such determinations, the
court and creditors must be provided with sufficient information to allow them to take a position on the proposed sale.

Id. at 842 (citations omitted).

Here, the Trustee marketed the Property via Keller Williams Realty and KW Commercial, which marketed the Property and its marketing efforts are detailed in the declaration of W. Darrow Fiedler. The sale appears to be made in good faith.

TENTATIVE RULING
Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as follows:
1. Approving the sale of the Property to the Buyer or successful overbidder;
2. Providing that the Trustee is authorized and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the estate any and all documents as reasonably may be necessary to implement the terms of the proposed sale;
3. Providing that the notice given by the Trustee in connection with the sale and hearing thereon is adequate, sufficient, proper and complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure;
4. Approving the overbid procedures;
5. Approving payment of liens and costs of sale directly from escrow; and
6. Waiving the 14-day stay prescribed by rule 6004(h) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
11:00 AM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez

Chapter 7
Martha Lorena Soto Jimenez Represented By Marlin Branstetter
Movant(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
11:00 AM
6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7

#14.00 Chapter 7 Trustee's Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 Between the Bankruptcy Estate and the Debtors

EH

Docket 189
Tentative Ruling:
10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On February 26, 2016, Samuel and Greeta Dason (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief. Lynda Bui is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate is certain real property located at 22780 Vista Grande Way, Grand Terrace, CA 92513 (the "Property"). On August 22, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion to Approve Compromise Under Rule 9019 (the "Motion"). In support of the Motion, the Trustee asserts that there is a dispute with the Debtors regarding the availability of equity in the Property for the benefit of creditors. The Trustee obtained a higher opinion of value from her real estate broker than the Debtor obtained. However, the Debtor has also countered that the arrears owed on the Property and a solar equipment lease encumbering the Property would impact the availability of equity for creditors. Based on these facts, the Trustee proposes approval of a settlement by which Greeta Dason will pay $20,000, representing non-exempt equity in the Property.

On September 6, 2018, Creditor Juddy Olivares ("Creditor") filed her Opposition to the Motion. The Debtor filed his reply to the Opposition on October 10, 2018 ("Reply"). The Creditor has now withdrawn her Opposition.

DISCUSSION
Rule 9019(a) authorizes the bankruptcy court to approve a compromise or settlement on the trustee's motion and after notice and a hearing. The bankruptcy court must consider all "factors relevant to a full and fair assessment of the wisdom of the proposed compromise." Protective Comm. for Indep. Stockholders of TMT Trailer
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7
Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson, 390 U.S. 414, 424, 88 S. Ct. 1157, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1968). In
other words, the bankruptcy court must find that the settlement is "fair and equitable" in order to approve it. Martin v. Kane (In re A & C Props.), 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986).
In conducting this inquiry, the bankruptcy court must consider the following
factors:

Id.

(a) the probability of success in the litigation; (b) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in the matter of collection; (c) the complexity of the litigation involved, and the expense, inconvenience and delay necessarily attending it; and (d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises.
The bankruptcy court enjoys broad discretion in approving a compromise because it "is uniquely situated to consider the equities and reasonableness [of it] " United
States v. Alaska Nat'l Bank (In re Walsh Construction, Inc.), 669 F.2d 1325, 1328 (9th Cir. 1982). As stated in A & C Props.:
The purpose of a compromise agreement is to allow the trustee and the creditors to avoid the expenses and burdens associated with litigating sharply contested and dubious claims. The law favors compromise and not litigation for its own sake, and as long as the bankruptcy court amply considered the various factors that determined the reasonableness of the compromise, the court's decision must be affirmed.
Id. (citations omitted).
On the other hand, even though the bankruptcy court has wide latitude in approving compromises, its discretion is not completely unfettered. See Woodson v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (In re Woodson), 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). The trustee bears the burden of proving to the bankruptcy court that the settlement is fair and equitable and should be approved. In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d at 1382.
On this record, the Court agrees with the Trustee that the expense and delay attendant to a sale of the Property is not likely to yield substantially more than the Trustee is able to obtain via the compromise. The Trustee’s evidence supports a finding that approval is in the best interests of the creditors and is reasonable under the facts of this case.

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, in deference to the Trustee’s business judgment and finding that the proposed compromise is "fair and equitable" under the circumstances, the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sam Daniel Dason and Greeta Sam Dason

Chapter 7
Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Joint Debtor(s):
Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Movant(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur
11:00 AM
6:18-11327

Latoya Joy Armstrong

Chapter 7

#15.00 CONT Order to show cause why John Alarcon should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §105 and F.R.B.P. 9020

From: 8/30/18, 9/27/18 EH
Docket 20

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Latoya Joy Armstrong Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion for Turnover of Property Motion Of The Chapter 7 Trustee For An Order For Turnover Of Property Of The Estate

Also #17 EH
Docket 46
Tentative Ruling:
10/17/18

BACKGROUND

On November 20, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Sean Karadas ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate are Small Business Administration loan funds totaling $327,653 (the "SBA Loan") obtained by the Debtor from First Home Bank for his wholly owned corporation, Pacific Trium, Inc. ("Pacific Trium") Trustee has evidence that almost immediately following the disbursement of loan funds to the Debtor, that the Debtor transferred the funds from Pacific Trium’s account to his personal account on May 31, 2017, and then from his account to his son’s account on June 20, 2017. First Home Bank has filed a dischargeability action against the Debtor objecting to the discharge of the Debtor’s personal guaranty and alleging fraud and misrepresentation by Debtor in obtaining the SBA Loan.

Trustee requests an order compelling turnover of the SBA Loan Proceeds, or their value, under penalty of civil contempt. Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

Under the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor has a duty to surrender property of the estate to the Trustee. 11 U.S.C. § 521(4). Furthermore, a trustee has the duty to "collect and reduce to money the property of the estate for which such trustee
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
serves " § 704(1).
The Trustee has established that the SBA Loan Proceeds likely constitute property of the estate under § 541 and that the Debtor likely retains control of the SBA Loan Proceeds. However, notwithstanding the likelihood that Debtor retains control of the SBA Loan Proceeds, the evidence indicates that the Motion should also have been served on the Debtor’s son, Turhan Karadas.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing to November 14, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for the Debtor to serve the Debtor’s son.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7

#17.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 40 Motion for Consent Order re: Claim of Creditor First Home Bank as Nondischargeable filed by Creditor First Home Bank

Also #16 EH
Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
10/17/2018
This matter is taken off calendar as duplicative of Matter No. 18, Docket No. 11 in the adversary case, 18-ap-01123.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#18.00 Motion for Consent Order re: Claim of Creditor First Home Bank as Nondischargeable

EH

Docket 11
Tentative Ruling:
10/17/18

DISCUSSION

On November 20, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Sean Karadas ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate are Small Business Administration loan funds totaling $327,653 (the "SBA Loan") obtained by the Debtor from First Home Bank for his wholly owned corporation, Pacific Trium, Inc. ("Pacific Trium") Trustee has evidence that almost immediately following the disbursement of loan funds to the Debtor, that the Debtor transferred the funds from Pacific Trium’s account to his personal account on May 31, 2017, and then from his account to his son’s account on June 20, 2017.

On May 24, 2018, First Home Bank filed a dischargeability action under §§ 523 and 727 against the Debtor objecting to the discharge of the Debtor’s personal guaranty and alleging fraud and misrepresentation by Debtor in obtaining the SBA Loan.

On September 11, 2018, First Home Bank filed a Motion for Consent Order re: Claim of Creditor First Home Bank as Nondischargeable ("Motion"). The Motion specifically seeks approval of the parties’ stipulation as to nondischargeability of the personal guaranty and separately seeks dismissal of the remaining claims. Although the Motion acknowledges that parties in interest may timely file a response to the Motion to pursue the §727 action, the Motion is deficient in that the proof of service fails to indicate service on the Debtor’s creditors. To date, the Court’s claims register reflects that 17 claims have been filed against the Debtor’s estate and as such, there are interested parties who may be interested in pursuing the §727 action.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to November 14, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for the Debtor to serve the Debtor’s creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Sean Karadas Pro Se
Movant(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Plaintiff(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:17-16064

Thomas Franklin Shea

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01161 Simons (TR) v. Thompson

#19.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01161. Complaint by Larry D Simons (TR) against Joseph Edward Thompson. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). Nature of Suit: (31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h))) (Simons (TR), Larry)

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Thomas Franklin Shea Represented By Richard J Hassen
Defendant(s):
Joseph Edward Thompson Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Marta Rose Shea Represented By Richard J Hassen
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Wesley H Avery
2:00 PM
6:17-15043

Sandra Lou Harter

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01040 Cisneros v. Rose et al

#20.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by A. Cisneros against Joseph Harter, Connie Flach, John Rose, Tammy Rose, Brennan Rose, KayLynne Rose. (Charge To Estate - $350.00) .- Complaint for: 1) Declaratory Relief; 2) Turnover of Property; and 3) Sale of Interest of Co-Owner in Property of the Estate [11 U.S.C. §§ 363 and 542] - Nature of Suit: 91 - Declaratory judgment, 11 Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property, 31 - Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h)
(Defendant Connie Flach Dismissed 6/5/18) (Defendant John Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant Tammy Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant Brennan Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant KayLynne Rose Dismissed 6/20/18) (Defendant Joseph Harter Dismissed 10/12/18)

From: 4/25/18, 6/27/18, 8/22/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 10/12/18
Tentative Ruling:
08/22/2018
The Status Conference is CONTINUED to October 17, 2018, 2:00 p.m. per the Plaintiff's request for time to finalize a settlement.

APPEARANCES WAIVED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sandra Lou Harter Represented By Carey C Pickford
2:00 PM
CONT...

Sandra Lou Harter

Chapter 7
Defendant(s):
John Rose Represented By
Dina Farhat
Tammy Rose Represented By
Dina Farhat
Brennan Rose Represented By Dina Farhat
KayLynne Rose Represented By Dina Farhat
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
Anthony A Friedman
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy
Anthony A Friedman
2:00 PM
6:17-13012

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al

#21.00 CONT Amended Motion for Order to Strike Joint Answer of Defendants for Willful Failure to Comply with the Initial Disclosures Under Rule 26(a) and Court's Order of June 13, 2018; and for Sanctions

From: 9/5/18 Also #22
EH

Docket 65

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Defendant(s):
Issa M Musharbash Pro Se
Amal Musharbash Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-13012

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01138 Musharbash et al v. Musharbash et al

#22.00 CONT Status conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01138. Complaint to Determine Non-Dischargeability of Debt by Phillip Musharbash , Violette Musharbash against Issa M Musharbbash , Amal Musharbbash

From: 9/20/17, 2/7/18, 3/7/18, 8/15/18, 9/5/18 Also #21
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Issa M Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Defendant(s):
Issa M Musharbash Pro Se
Amal Musharbash Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Amal Issa Musharbash Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Plaintiff(s):
Phillip Musharbash Pro Se
Violette Musharbash Pro Se
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Issa M Musharbash

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#23.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment From: 7/25/18, 10/10/18
Also #24 EH
Docket 54
Tentative Ruling:

10/10/2018

This hearing on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment was continued from July 25, 2018. At the prior hearing, the Court continued the hearing for the Plaintiff and Defendant to have an opportunity to address the issue of willfulness under § 523(a)(6) in accordance with the Ninth Circuit BAP’s decision in In re Arden, 2015 WL 4068962, at *9 (9th Cir. BAP 2015)(citing Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert Oliker, 47 Cal.3d 863, 871–72 (1989)).

PERSONAL SERVICE

The Defendant/Debtor again argues that under California law, issue preclusion is not available unless the defendant "has been personally served with summons or has actual knowledge of the existence of the litigation." (Docket 176 at 6). In support, the Debtor cites to In re Williams' Estate (Williams), 36 Cal. 2d 289, 297, 223 P.2d 248, 254 (1950), which was in turn cited with approval by In re Harmon, 250 F.3d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 2001). These cases, however, underscore that in order to limit the principle of collateral estoppel, there must be a "complete lack of knowledge on the part of a defendant of the action". Id. (emphasis added). In its prior tentative ruling, the Court noted that the failure of the Debtor’s declaration to address when or whether
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
he had knowledge of the litigation that resulted in the default judgment was fatal. Now, having had the opportunity to file a new declaration, the Debtor still fails to address this issue instead reiterating that he was out of the country when the Plaintiff tried to effectuate service on him. The Plaintiff had previously indicated that due to the failure to locate the Debtor, that the Debtor was served via publication in the prior action and in response, the Debtor asserted that the failure of the Plaintiff to provide evidence of an order permitting service by publication should be determinative.
However, in reply, the Plaintiff has now provided a copy of the State Court’s Order for Publication. (Docket 177, at Ex. 1). Based on the foregoing evidence that Debtor was properly served by publication and, in particular due to Defendant/Debtor’s failure to address the issue of whether he had "complete lack of knowledge" of the State Court litigation, the Court finds that the Plaintiff’s objection that collateral estoppel should not apply to the instant case is overruled. Finally, the Debtor’s related arguments that the State Court Default Judgment is void as a matter of law for denying the Debtor due process are found to be unpersuasive.

WILLFULLNESS

"A ‘willful’ injury is a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Barboza, 545 F.3d at 706, quoting Kawaauhau
v. Geiger, 523 U .S. 57, 61 (1998). To satisfy the willfulness requirement, it must be shown that the debtor either had "a subjective intent to harm or a subjective belief that harm is substantially certain." Su, 290 F.3d at 1144. When determining the debtor's intent under § 523(a)(6), there is a presumption that the debtor knows the natural consequences of his actions. Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206.

As a threshold matter, the Court overrules the Debtor’s objections to the declaration of the Deborah Slaieh.

As to the issue of "willfulness", the Court finds the Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief persuasive. (Docket No. 175). In particular, the Supplemental Brief points to the specific allegations that the Debtor intended to injure the Plaintiff by filing litigation against him. The State Court Complaint contained numerous allegations that Debtor’s actions were "carried out in a deliberate, callous, malicious, despicable and intentional manner in order to injure and damage him." Additionally, the record before the trial
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
court contained declaration from both the Plaintiff and Debtor’s ex-wife which supported a finding that the primary purpose behind the filing of the litigation was to injure the Plaintiff. Here, the Court finds that the State Court necessarily awarded punitive damages based on the Debtor’s intent to injure the Plaintiff and infers such intent to injure from a finding that the actor committed malice in fact based on the facts in the record detailed above, in addition to the facts set forth in the Plaintiff’s filings in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has met the requirements to satisfy California’s requirements for application of collateral estoppel on the issue of "intent to injure", and on that basis, the Court finds that the Default Judgment against the Debtor is determinative on the issue of willfulness under § 523(a)(6).

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the Court’s prior tentative ruling, in addition to the instant tentative ruling, and having considered the arguments and filings of the parties, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has established that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.

07/25/2018

BACKGROUND

On December 18, 2013, Nabeel Slaieh ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. On March 24, 2014, W E Jon Albrecht ("Plaintiff") filed the instant complaint to determine dischargeability of debt pursuant to § 523(a)(6). On June 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed his Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion"). On July 3, 2018, the Debtor filed his opposition to the Motion ("Opposition"). On the same date, the Debtor filed a substitution of attorney by which the Debtor indicated his intent to represent himself in propria persona going forward.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh
As a threshold matter, the Court must address the manner in which the

Chapter 7
Opposition was filed. Prior to the filing of the Substitution of Attorney Form, the Debtor was represented by George Saba ("Saba"). However, per the State Bar of California website, Mr. Saba has not been eligible to practice law in California since December 2017. Pursuant to the Court’s manual, Section 3.1(c) and Section 3.2(b), attorneys admitted to practice in the Central District of California, currently in good standing, are eligible to register as CM/ECF users with the rights to log in and file documents. Here, the Debtor, acting in pro per, is not eligible to file documents using CM/ECF and it was improper for Mr. Saba to use the CM/ECF system to improperly file a document for a party who he is no longer representing and who he is no longer able to represent given his ineligibility to practice law. Further, Section 3.2(d)(1) prohibits a registered user from knowingly permitting or causing to permit his or her login and password to be utilized by anyone. Here, Mr. Saba has violated the Court’s rules regarding CM/ECF filing. Based on the improper filing of the Opposition, the Court is inclined to issue an OSC why Mr. Saba’s CM/ECF rights should not be suspended or cancelled pursuant to Section 3.2(d)(3) of the Court Manual.

Based on the foregoing, the Court strikes the Opposition as improperly filed. A reply to the Opposition was filed on July 11, 2018 ("Reply"), as well as separately filed objections to the Declaration of Defendant in support of the Opposition (Docket No. 172).

DISCUSSION

Summary Judgment

A court may grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. FRBP 7056 (incorporating FRCP 56). In determining whether to grant a motion for summary judgment, courts must view the record and all inferences drawn from it in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Trunk v. City of San Diego, 629 F.3d 1099, 1105 (9th Cir.2011).
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Judicial Notice

In support of the Motion, Plaintiff requests that this Court take judicial notice of (1) The Certified Copy of Complaint for Malicious Prosecution, RJN, Ex. 1, (2) the Certified Copy of Summons filed January 25, 2011, RJN, Ex. 2, (3) the Certified Copy of Proof of Service of Summons, RJN, Ex. 3, and (4) the Copy of Judgment, RJN, Ex. 4. The Court takes judicial notice of these filings.

Nondischargeability under § 523(a)(6)

Section 523(a)(6) excepts from discharge debts arising from a debtor's willful and malicious injury to another person. Barboza v. New Form, Inc. (In re Barboza), 545 F.3d 702, 706 (9th Cir.2008). The willful and malice requirements must be analyzed separately, Carillo v. Su (In re Su), 290 F.3d 1140, 1146–47 (2002), and the court must determine that both have been met, Ormsby v. First Am. Title Co. of Nev. (In re Ormsby), 591 F.3d 1199, 1206 (9th Cir. 2010).

"A ‘willful’ injury is a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury." Barboza, 545 F.3d at 706, quoting Kawaauhau
v. Geiger, 523 U .S. 57, 61 (1998). To satisfy the willfulness requirement, it must be shown that the debtor either had "a subjective intent to harm or a subjective belief that harm is substantially certain." Su, 290 F.3d at 1144. When determining the debtor's intent under § 523(a)(6), there is a presumption that the debtor knows the natural consequences of his actions. Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206.

"A malicious injury involves ‘(1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse.’ " Su, 290 F.3d at 1146–47, quoting Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich), 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir.2001). "Within the plain meaning of this definition, it is the wrongful act that must be committed intentionally rather than the injury itself." Jett v. Sicroff (In re Sicroff), 401 F.3d 1101, 1106 (9th Cir.2005), citing Murray v. Bammer (In re Bammer), 131 F.3d 788, 791 (9th Cir.1997)("This four-part definition does not require a showing of biblical malice, i.e., personal hatred, spite, or ill will. Nor does it require a showing of an intent to injure, but rather it requires only an intentional act which causes injury."). "Malice may be inferred based on the nature of the wrongful act."
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7
Ormsby, 591 F.3d at 1206, citing Transamerica Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Littleton (In re Littleton), 942 F.2d 551, 554 (9th Cir.1991)(determining that, in the case of conversion, malice may be inferred).

In the instant action, the Plaintiff obtained a judgment ("Judgment) in State Court as against the Defendant based on a complaint for malicious prosecution (the "State Action"). The Plaintiff now moves under a theory of collateral estoppel for summary judgment finding that the Judgment is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6).

Collateral Estoppel

A bankruptcy court may grant summary judgment based on the issue preclusive effect of an existing state court judgment. See Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon), 250 F.3d 1240, 1245 (9th Cir.2001). In doing so, it must apply the forum state's issue preclusion law. Id. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Here, California preclusion law applies.

In California, issue preclusion bars relitigation of an issue when: 1) the issue sought to be precluded is identical to that decided in a prior proceeding; 2) the issue was actually litigated in the prior proceeding; 3) the issue was necessarily decided in the prior proceeding; and 4) the decision in the prior proceeding is final and on the merits. Lucido v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 335, 341 (1990). Additionally, in California, issue preclusion may only be applied if it furthers underlying public policies. See id. at 343.

The party asserting issue preclusion bears the burden of establishing these requirements. Id. at 341. To do so, "[the] party must produce a record sufficient to reveal the controlling facts and pinpoint the exact issues litigated in the prior action. Any reasonable doubt as to what was decided by a prior judgment should be resolved against allowing [issue preclusive] effect." Kelly v. Okoye (In re Kelly), 182 B.R. 255, 258 (9th Cir.BAP1995), aff'd, 100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir.1996).

Here, the Plaintiff obtained a Judgment on a malicious prosecution action under California law. The Court now turns to whether ‘malicious prosecution’ satisfies the requirements for collateral estoppel under California law.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

Application of law to cause of action for malicious prosecution

In California, the common law tort of malicious prosecution provides a remedy for individuals subjected to maliciously instituted criminal and civil proceedings. In re Arden, 2015 WL 4068962, at *9 (9th Cir. BAP 2015)(citing Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert Oliker, 47 Cal.3d 863, 871–72 (1989)). To establish a cause of action for malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding, the plaintiff must show "that the prior action (1) was commenced [or continued] by or at the direction of the defendant and was pursued to a legal termination in his [or her], plaintiff's, favor;
was brought without probable cause; and (3) was initiated [or continued] with malice." Id., quoting Bertero v. Nat'l Gen. Corp., 13 Cal.3d 43, 50 (1974)(internal quotation marks omitted).

In Arden, the BAP specifically considered whether the tort of malicious prosecution satisfies both the willful and malicious prongs of § 523(a)(6):

The California Supreme Court has explained:

[T]he principal situations in which the civil proceedings are initiated for an improper purpose are those in which (1) the person instituting them does not believe that his claim may be held valid; (2) the proceedings are begun primarily because of hostility or ill will; (3) the proceedings are initiated solely for

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

the purpose of depriving the person against whom they are instituted of a beneficial use of his property; [or] (4) the proceedings are initiated for the purpose of forcing a settlement which has no relation to the merits of the claim.

Albertson, 46 Cal.2d at 383, quoting Rest., Torts § 676. Accordingly, in a malicious prosecution action, the proof may or may not establish a willful intent to injure on the part of the defendant.

Chapter 7

Arden at *9-10.

As underscored in Arden, willfulness is not a separate and distinct element of the tort of malicious prosecution, though willfulness may be inferred from the debtor's intent in commencing or continuing litigation. Moreover, " ‘[m]erely because a tort is classified as intentional does not mean that any injury caused by the tortfeasor is willful.’ " Ditto v. McCurdy, 510 F.3d 1070, 1078 (9th Cir.2007), quoting Miller v.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

561, 562 (9th Cir. 2017); Plyam v. Precision Development, LLC (In re Plyam), 530

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the Motion for additional briefing regarding the issue of "willfulness".

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By

George A Saba - INACTIVE -

Defendant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice

Movant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

Bruce A Boice

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

D Edward Hays David Wood Matthew Grimshaw

2:00 PM

6:13-30133

Nabeel Slaieh

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01081 Albrecht v. Slaieh

#24.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:14-ap-01081. Complaint by

W.E. Jon Albrecht against Nabeel Slaieh. willful and malicious injury))

HOLDING DATE

From: 10/19/16, 12/14/16, 2/15/17, 3/29/17, 6/7/17, 10/25/17, 4/25/18, 7/25/18, 10/10/18

Also #23 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By

George A Saba - INACTIVE -

Defendant(s):

Nabeel Slaieh Represented By Stephen B Mashney Bruce A Boice

Plaintiff(s):

W E Jon Albrecht Represented By William L Miltner Robert C Harvey

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Nabeel Slaieh

D Edward Hays David Wood Matthew Grimshaw

Chapter 7

3:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #25.00 CONT Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Notice of Motion and Emergency Motion for (a) Order Approving Stipulation for Interim Use of Cash Collateral; (b) Granting of Adequate Protection; (c) Granting Related Relief

From: 10/5/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18 Also #26

Docket 3

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

3:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #26.00 CONT Motion for Order: (1) Approving the Sale of Substantially All of the Assets of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 363(b)(1);

(2) Approving the Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts; and (3)

Granting Related Relief

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 10/15/18, 10/16/18 Also #25

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

11:00 AM

6:16-12849

Elsy G. Mejia

Chapter 13 #1.00 CONT Motion for an Order Vacating the Dismissal of Case due to attorney error and to reinstate case pursuant to 11 U.S.C § 105 AND F.R.C.P 60(b)(l)

From: 9/27/18 EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Joint Debtor(s):

Party Information

Elsy G. Mejia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne

Movant(s):

Elsy G. Mejia Represented By

James Geoffrey Beirne James Geoffrey Beirne James Geoffrey Beirne

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/27/18

Also #3 EH

Docket 59

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 9/13/18, 9/27/18 Also #2

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Movant(s):

John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen

Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-11261

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Order to show cause why Alon Darvish should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 105 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020

CASE DISMISSED 3/13/17

From: 11/30/17, 1/25/18, 4/12/18, 6/14/18, 8/23/18

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

11/30/17

BACKGROUND

On February 21, 2017, Ernie Macias ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtor’s case was filed by Alon Darvish ("Darvish"). On March 13, 2017, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file information.

On March 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Disgorge Attorney’s Fees ("Disgorgement Motion"). On June 13, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the UST’s Disgorgement Motion (the "Disgorgement Order"). The Disgorgement Order required Darvish to file his disclosure of compensation, and to disgorge fees received from the Debtor back to him.

On September 20, 2017, the UST filed its Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why Alon Darvish Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11

U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020 (the "Motion for OSC"). The Motion for OSC specifically asserted that Darvish had failed to comply with any part of the Disgorgement Order. The UST’s Motion for OSC further asserted that Darvish had repeatedly failed to disclose compensation and had been sanctioned for such conduct under similar circumstances in at least 6 other cases. (Motion for OSC at 9).

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13

On October 20, 2017, the Court granted the Motion for OSC and ordered Darvish to show cause why he should not be held in contempt (the "OSC"). Darvish filed his response to the OSC on November 16, 2017 ("Response"). On November 21, 2017, the UST replied to the Response.

DISCUSSION

In his Response, Darvish indicated that his practice includes the filing of skeletal petitions for chapter 13 debtors for the purpose of stopping foreclosures. He indicated that when such skeletal petitions are filed, his software does not file the Disclosure of Compensation. Darvish asserts that he is a solo practitioner who is overwhelmed and understaffed and who is trying to rectify the issues in his practice. In Reply, the UST objects particularly to Darvish’s failure to outline specific steps he intends to take to remedy the issues at his firm. The UST is also concerned that Darvish has essentially admitted that his practice includes the filing of abusive petitions intended solely to avoid foreclosures. The UST requests that the Court continue the matter for Darvish to set forth specific remedial actions as ordered. The UST also requests that the Court separately consider whether a separate order to show cause is justified based on Darvish’s inherently abusive prevention practice.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court agrees with the UST that Darvish’s explanation is insufficient. Darvish’s Response indicates clearly the reason for the failure to file disclosure of compensation forms. Despite this fact, he does not explain the ongoing failure to file these forms, particularly where he has previously been sanctioned for failing to disclose his compensation. The ongoing failure to file required documents, despite having already been sanctioned, supports the UST’s request for a specific plan of remediation. Absent such plan, Darvish may simply continue to rely on his thus far unreliable bankruptcy filing software.

Separately, the UST’s concern regarding Darvish’s practice of filing skeletal petitions is well-taken. In particular, if Darvish is advising his clients to file abusive petitions to

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13

delay foreclosure, such conduct may warrant further sanctions/discipline.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ernie Macias Represented By

Alon Darvish

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-14972

Jude Okwor

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jude Okwor Represented By

Javier H Castillo

Movant(s):

Jude Okwor Represented By

Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 150 W. Highland Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: MILESTONE FINANCIAL LLC

From: 9/25/18 EH

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

11:00 AM

CONT...

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13

indicating that the Chapter 13 plan payments are current.

Parties to discuss status of Chapter 13 plan payments and whether funds have been received by Movant and/or its loan servicer, Del Toro Loan Servicing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Movant(s):

Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion to Disallow Claim Number 1-1 by Claimant Capital One, N.A. Also #8 - #13

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

10/18/18

BACKGROUND:

On March 29, 2018, Jaelyn Young ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Subsequently, on June 25, 2018, Debtor received in a discharge in a simultaneously pending Chapter 7 case. On June 28, 2018, Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed.

On September 4, 2018, Debtor filed seven claim objections, objecting to claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 10. Debtor contends that all seven of these claims were filed in violation of the discharge injunction. On September 17, 2018, Midland Credit Management, Inc. withdrew claim 6.

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13

Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b) states the following:

Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall

Movant(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #11.00 Motion to Disallow Claim Number 7-1 by Claimant Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC

Also #7 - #13 EH

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

See #7

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #12.00 Motion to Disallow Claim Number 8-1 by Claimant Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC

Also #7 - #13 EH

Docket 54

Tentative Ruling:

See #7

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #13.00 Motion to Disallow Claim Number 10-1 by Claimant LVNV Funding, LLC Also #7 - #12

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:

See #7

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14020

Patricia Ann Cook

Chapter 13 #14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/5/18, 7/19/18, 8/23/18

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 10/11/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Patricia Ann Cook Represented By Brad Weil

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14257

Adam Casey Addison

Chapter 13 #15.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18, 9/13/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adam Casey Addison Represented By Nima S Vokshori Luke Jackson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14336

Peter Najim

Chapter 13 #16.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18, 8/23/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Peter Najim Represented By

Ivan Trahan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14388

Jesus Pabloff and Virginia Pabloff

Chapter 13 #17.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18, 9/27/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

From: 8/30/18 Also #22

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16237

Miguel Santa Maria and Lilia Maldonado

Chapter 13 #22.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 9/27/18

Also #21 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Miguel Santa Maria Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilia Maldonado Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16363

Lisa Conway

Chapter 13 #23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/26/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lisa Conway Represented By

Douglas E Klein

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16366

Jose Luis Tafoya

Chapter 13 #24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Luis Tafoya Represented By Clay E Presley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16403

Toni Elizabeth Prima - Zuvich

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/11/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Toni Elizabeth Prima - Zuvich Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16451

Richard Daniel Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard Daniel Gutierrez Represented By Heather J Canning

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16458

Leonard Walter Frost, Jr. and Joan Cheng Frost

Chapter 13 #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Leonard Walter Frost Jr. Represented By Kristin R Lamar

Joint Debtor(s):

Joan Cheng Frost Represented By Kristin R Lamar

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16461

Deborah A Bowie

Chapter 13 #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/17/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Deborah A Bowie Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16480

Shelly Rose Lefebvre

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Shelly Rose Lefebvre Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16481

Craig Anton Vendeville and Janelle Ronee Vendeville

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Harold Edward Correa Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Joint Debtor(s):

David Corey White Represented By Matthew D. Resnik

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16513

Richard C. Baker, Jr. and Melissa J. Baker

Chapter 13 #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Richard C. Baker Jr. Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Melissa J. Baker Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16520

Charles Lee Dismukes

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16610

Candelario P Hernandez

Chapter 13 #42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Sherry Ann Beardsley Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16687

Steve Jaime

Chapter 13 #49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Steve Jaime Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16694

Cynthia M Gonzalez and Guadalupe Siddiqui

Chapter 13 #50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Cynthia M Gonzalez Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Guadalupe Siddiqui Represented By Paul Y Lee

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16705

Tyreese Nabors

Chapter 13 #51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/27/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Arturo Suarez Represented By Tamar Terzian

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosemary Suarez Represented By Tamar Terzian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:13-26237

Carlos Vincent Valdez and Grace G. Valdez

Chapter 13 #55.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 69

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Carlos Vincent Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Joint Debtor(s):

Grace G. Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-18156

Jose Luis Gutierrez and Patricia Gutierrez

Chapter 13 #56.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/27/18

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Kimberly Ann Bowen Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-15453

Brenda Fleming Bell

Chapter 13 #67.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/3/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

John Wesley Wilson Jr. Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Michelle Janet Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-20163

Sandra M. Hankins

Chapter 13 #71.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 57

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 8/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Joint Debtor(s):

Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-18366

Kisha Eugena Stegall-Hill

Chapter 13 #75.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/23/18, 8/30/18, 9/27/18

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Oracio Rosales Hernandez Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-20487

Ann Marie Smith

Chapter 13 #79.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 51

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/11/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ann Marie Smith Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10377

Dana Lashonn Hays

Chapter 13 #80.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Dana Lashonn Hays Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-11993

Anisha Christel Wilson

Chapter 13 #81.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/13/18, 9/27/18

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Anisha Christel Wilson Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-10929

Christopher John Helme

Chapter 13 #1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 9950 Sofia Court, Moreno Valley, California 92557

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 9/25/18 EH

Docket 161

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT relief from § 1301(a) stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher John Helme Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

US Bank National Association, as Represented By

Tyneia Merritt

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Christopher John Helme

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-13464

Alvin M. Ching and Aphrodyte D. Ching

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Toyota Sienna

MOVANT: ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

10/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because it does not appear that the motion was served on any co-debtor as that term is used in the statute. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alvin M. Ching Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Joint Debtor(s):

Aphrodyte D. Ching Represented By Keith Q Nguyen

Movant(s):

Arrowhead Credit Union Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Alvin M. Ching and Aphrodyte D. Ching

Karel G Rocha

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-10414

Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14785 Alba Way, Moreno Valley, CA 92553

MOVANT: PACIFIC UNION FINANCIAL LLC

From: 9/25/18 EH

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Leonel Villa Represented By

Jaime A Cuevas Jr.

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucila Pineda Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.

Movant(s):

Pacific Union Financial, LLC Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Leonel Villa and Lucila Pineda

Nancy L Lee

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12862

Antoinette Marie Tutt

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 5527 North Valles Drive, San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 9/25/18 EH

Docket 43

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to discuss status of arrears, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Antoinette Marie Tutt Represented By Brian C Miles

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank Trust National Represented By Jamie D Hanawalt Gilbert R Yabes

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Antoinette Marie Tutt

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16741

Socorro Patino

Chapter 7 #5.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Confirming Termination of Stay under 11 U.S.C. 362(j) or That No Stay is in Effect under 11 U.S.C.

362(c)(4)(A)(ii) 58 Whirlaway St MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. CASE DISMISSED 10/22/18

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

10/23/2018

Service is Improper Opposition: None

It appears that the automatic stay terminated on September 9, 2018, due to the operation of 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3). Specifically, it appears that Debtor had a Chapter 7 case pending within the year prior to the petition date of the instant case, and that such earlier case was dismissed. Nevertheless, the Court notes that Movant did not indicate an opposition deadline in its moving papers.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Socorro Patino Represented By David R Chase

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Socorro Patino

Chapter 7

Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17296

Erick Pinedo and Bridgette Pinedo

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2004 Ford Mustang, VIN 1FAFP40654F210846

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

10/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). DENY request for relief pursuant to § 362(d)(2) because the motion (pg. 4) does not provide any basis for the request. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Erick Pinedo Represented By

Daniel King

Joint Debtor(s):

Bridgette Pinedo Represented By Daniel King

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Erick Pinedo and Bridgette Pinedo

Sheryl K Ith

Chapter 7

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17349

Thomas More Butler and Tamara Butler

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 12630 Harris Ave., Lynwood, CA 90262-5217

MOVANT: MILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC

Docket 19

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/21/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Thomas More Butler Represented By

Stuart G Steingraber

Joint Debtor(s):

Tamara Butler Represented By

Stuart G Steingraber

Movant(s):

Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17510

Jesus Suarez

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 7791 Citrus Ave, Fontana, CA 92336

MOVANT: US BANK NA AS TRUSTEE

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

10/23/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jesus Suarez Pro Se
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank N.A., as trustee, on behalf Represented By
Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18457

Juan A Martinez

Chapter 13

#9.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate all property of the debtor

MOVANT: JUAN A MARTINEZ

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
10/23/2018

Service: Improper Opposition: None

The Court notes that Debtor has failed to serve the secured creditor pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004, as required by this Court’s procedures.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Movant(s):
Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#10.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 2/6/18, 2/13/18, 3/6/18, 3/20/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18 Also #11
EH

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
2:00 PM
6:17-15816

Integrated Wealth Management Inc

Chapter 11

#11.00 Post Confirmation Status Conference Also #10
EH

Docket 277

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Integrated Wealth Management Inc Represented By
Andrew B Levin Robert E Opera Jim D Bauch
2:00 PM
6:18-10155

Jose De Jesus Hernandez

Chapter 11

#12.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
Requiring Status Report EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By

Eric Bensamochan

2:00 PM

6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11 #13.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 8/21/18

Also #14 EH

Docket 78

Tentative Ruling:

8/21/18

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 26, 2018, Markus Boyd ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On February 13, 2018, the Court entered an interim order approving use of cash collateral. On March 6, 2018, the Court entered orders (1) authorizing Debtor to provide adequate assurance of payment to utility service providers and; (2) approving a budget. On March 26, 2018, the Court authorized the employment of Nicholas Gebelt as counsel for Debtor. On April 26, 2018, the Court disallowed four claims of American Express (claim numbers 2 and 4-6).

On June 22, 2018, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan. On August 7, 2018, UST filed a limited objection to Debtor’s disclosure statement.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
In addition to the disclosure statement, the following exhibits are included: (1) "Treatment of Claims/Interests" (Exhibit A); (2) "Executory Contracts & Unexpired Leases" (Exhibit B); (3) "Cash Flow Projections" (Exhibit C); (4) "Recent Financial History" (Exhibit D); (5) "Secured Claims" (Exhibit E); (6) "General Unsecured Claims, in Class 4A or 4B" (Exhibit F); "Liquidating Analysis" (Exhibit G); "Endnotes/Continuation Sheets" (which includes a supplement) (Exhibit H). Debtor has used the Court’s optional disclosure statement form and worksheets, and, therefore, the format of the disclosure statement is adequate.

The Chapter 11 Plan’s proposed effective date is October 21, 2018. There are four classes of claims and four listed categories of unclassified claims1:
1. Class 1: Arrears secured by real property -- $174,971.67 claim, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months. Debtor’s Exhibit A contains a row for arrears on the second and third deeds of trust, but does not identify any amount owing.
2. Class 2: Additional claims secured by real property – Debtor lists three different claims within this class. Debtor proposes to continue paying his mortgage (identified as $772,733.45)2, over 230 months and at 2% interest. Debtor proposes to cure his delinquency on HOA dues over 60 months. Debtor has included a row for, presumably, future HOA dues but no amount is listed. Nor is it clear that this class is truly unimpaired.
3. Class 3: Priority claims: Debtor’s plan does not list any claims in class 3
4. Class 4: General Unsecured – $45,151.20, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months.
  1. Type 1: UST fees ($650) – paid in full on effective date
  2. Type 2: Taxes (IRS) – approximately $80k, paid over 51 months
  3. Type 3: Taxes (FTB) –$5,651.86, paid over 51 months
  4. Type 4: Nicholas Gebelt’s fees ($30k)—paid in full on effective date
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Markus Anthony Boyd
  5. Type 5: Accountant’s fees – none listed
LEGAL ANALYSIS

A. Adequate Information

Chapter 11

Party Information

Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt

2:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #15.00 CONT Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Notice of Motion and Emergency Motion for (a) Order Approving Stipulation for Interim Use of Cash Collateral; (b) Granting of Adequate Protection; (c) Granting Related Relief

From: 10/5/18, 10/15/18, 10/16/18, 10/17/18

Also #16 EH

Docket 3

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

2:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #16.00 CONT Motion for Order: (1) Approving the Sale of Substantially All of the Assets of the Estate Free and Clear of Liens Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 363(b)(1);

(2) Approving the Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts; and (3)

Granting Related Relief

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 10/15/18, 10/16/18, 10/17/18

Also #15 EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #1.00 Motion To Reconsider Order Allowing Debtors To File Amended Schedules Also #2

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #2.00 Motion Objecting To Debtors Claims Of Exemption In Proceeds From Personal Injury Case Pursuant To CCP § 704.140(b)

Also #1 EH

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #3.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 8 filed by Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. as Not Allowable Against the Estate

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18 Also #4 & #5

Docket 104

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

BACKGROUND:

On July 13, 2018, the Trustee filed his objection to Claim No. 8 ("Claim") of Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. (the "Claimant"). The Trustee’s Objection asserts that the Claim is supported by documentation showing that it is for services rendered to MCG Development, an entity that is not the Debtor and therefore not entitled to allowance as a claim.

On August 6, 2018, the Claimant filed its response to the Objection ("Response"). On September 19, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply ("Reply")

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

Here, Trustee has pointed to the fact that the evidence attached to the Claim are addressed to Paul Minnick as a representative of MCG Development. In response, Claimant has provided the same documents referenced by the Trustee and has failed to provide any admissible evidence indicating that liability on the contract can be collected against the Debtor’s estate.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection disallowing Claim No. 8 of the Claimant.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #4.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 10 filed by Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. as Not Allowable Against Estate

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18 Also #3 & #5

Docket 108

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

TENTATIVE RULING

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection and DISALLOW Claim No. 10 in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #5.00 CONT Motion to Allow Claim 7 filed by Norman A. Musselman as Fully Secured, Not Entitled to a Dividend

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18 Also #3 & #4

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-21570

Janice Elaine Cox

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 5 by Claimant County of San Bernardino Office of the Tax Collector

Docket 82

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/2018

BACKGROUND:

On November 30, 2015, Janice Cox ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On March 21, 2016, Debtor received a Chapter 7 discharge. On May 23, 2016, the County of San Bernardino ("Creditor") filed a claim in the amount of $33,640.95 ("Claim 5"), secured by certain real property located in Big Bear City, CA (the "Property").

On February 21, 2018, Trustee obtained an order directing Debtor to turnover the Property (the "Property"). On May 10, 2018, the Court entered an order authorizing Trustee to sell the Property. The sale order authorized Trustee to make certain distributions, including making payment on delinquent property taxes. On September 18, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to Claim 5. The Court notes that Trustee did not use the mandatory claim objection form. The basis of Trustee’s claim objection is that Claim 5 was paid off with proceeds of the sale of the Property.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Janice Elaine Cox

Chapter 7

APPLICABLE LAW:

ANALYSIS:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Janice Elaine Cox

Chapter 7

11 U.S.C. § 502(b) states the following:

Except as provided in subsections (e)(2), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of this section, if such objection to a claim is made, the court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of such claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount.

(emphasis added). The plain language of the above statute is that the amount of a claim shall be determined as of the petition date. Because Trustee’s objection fails to raise any reason why Claim 5 does not accurately represent Creditor’s claim as of the petition date, the objection fails to raise a legally cognizable grounds for disallowing the claim. Further, Claim 5 is fully secured, and presumably Trustee would not be making a distribution on it.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Janice Elaine Cox Represented By Rajiv Jain

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Janice Elaine Cox

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O

11:00 AM

6:16-10197

Ferdinand D Castillo

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 4 by Claimant San Bernardino County Tax Collector

Docket 95

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/2018

BACKGROUND:

On January 11, 2016, Ferdinand Castillo ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On April 25, 2016, Debtor received a Chapter 7 discharge. On September 20, 2016, the San Bernardino County Tax Collector ("Creditor") filed a claim in the amount of $13,829.935 ("Claim 4"), secured by certain real property located in Chino Hills, CA (the "Property").

On December 15, 2016, Wells Fargo Bank, the holder of the first deed of trust on the Property, obtained relief from stay. On September 18, 2018, Trustee filed an objection to Claim 4. Trustee says the Property was foreclosed upon on July 31, 2017.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ferdinand D Castillo

Chapter 7

interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). See Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

ANALYSIS:

11 U.S.C. § 502(b) states the following:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Ferdinand D Castillo

Chapter 7

(emphasis added). The plain language of the above statute is that the amount of a claim shall be determined as of the petition date. Because Trustee’s objection fails to raise any reason why Claim 4 does not accurately represent Creditor’s claim as of the petition date, the objection fails to raise a legally cognizable grounds for disallowing the claim.

Additionally, even if Trustee’s objection raised a legally cognizable argument, the objection does not contain any evidence establishing that Creditor was paid. Further, Claim 4 is fully secured, and presumably Trustee would not be making a distribution on it.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to OVERRULE the objection.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Ferdinand D Castillo Represented By Walter Scott

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Ferdinand D Castillo

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By William Malcolm Christina J O

11:00 AM

6:16-20927

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7 #8.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mee Soon Kim Represented By Minh Duy Nguyen

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By David Seror Michael W Davis

Jessica L Bagdanov

11:00 AM

6:17-11834

David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood

Chapter 7 #9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee’s Fees: $ 4,950.00 Trustee’s Expenses: $ 0

Attorney Fees: $ 20,482.50

Attorney Costs: $ 677.91

The Court is inclined to disallow all requested expenses of Trustee because the Trustee has not provided an itemized expense list or otherwise addressed the requested expenses in any manner.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Leroy Norwood Represented By Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Carol Ann Norwood Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood

Jenny L Doling

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Leonard M Shulman Lynda T Bui

11:00 AM

6:17-16586

Anthony Joseph George and Susie Annette George

Chapter 7 #10.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The application for compensation of the Trustee has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee’s Fees: $ 2,000.00 Trustee’s Expenses: $ 0

The Court is inclined to disapprove all requested expenses because Trustee has not included an itemized expense list or otherwise addresses the requested expenses in any manner.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Anthony Joseph George Represented By Joel M Feinstein

Joint Debtor(s):

Susie Annette George Represented By Joel M Feinstein

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Anthony Joseph George and Susie Annette George

Chapter 7

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-14330

Charles E. Hurd and Gracie Hurd

Chapter 7 #11.00 Motion to Appoint Charles E. Hurd as Next Friend EH

Docket 22

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/2018

BACKGROUND

On May 22, 2018, Charles & Gracie Hurd (collectively, "Debtors"; individually, "Charles" and "Gracie") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 2, 2018, Debtors filed a change of address, indicating that they had moved to Ohio.

On September 13, 2018, Debtors filed a motion to appoint Charles as the next friend of Gracie. Charles’s declaration states that Gracie "currently suffers from major back problems as a result of a fall two years ago. As a result of this issue she is unable to move and is incoherent most of the time due to the medications." Debtor has provided a doctor’s note, dated July 30, 2018, which states "patient is disabled and unable to travel until estimated twelve months."

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1004.1 allows "a representative, including a general guardian, committee, conservator, or similar fiduciary," to file a voluntary petition on behalf of an incompetent person.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charles E. Hurd and Gracie Hurd

Chapter 7

The rule further provides that:

[a]n infant or incompetent person who does not have a duly appointed representative may file a voluntary petition by next friend or guardian ad litem. The court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for an infant or incompetent person who is a debtor and is not otherwise represented or shall make any other order to protect the infant or incompetent debtor.

Rule 1004.1 is patterned after FED.R.CIV.P. Rule 17(c), which applies to adversary proceedings pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7017. That rule provides that an incompetent person may sue "by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem" if the incompetent person does not have a duly appointed representative, and provides that "[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action."

Cases interpreting Rule 17(c) look to the law of the state in which the subject is domiciled and follow the state's incompetency laws." In re Burchell, 2014 WL 1304635, at *1 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2014)(internal citations omitted). This court shall thus look to the California Probate Code’s § 811 which outlines the possible bases for a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks capacity to make a decision or do a certain act, including for example, incapacity to contract or to execute wills or trusts.

In support of the Motion, the Debtors have attached the Declaration of Charles in which he asserts that Gracie "currently suffers from major back problems as a result of a fall two years ago. As a result of this issue she is unable to move and is incoherent most of the time due to the medications." Notwithstanding this assertion, § 811(d) provides that "the mere diagnosis of a mental or physical disorder shall not be sufficient in and of itself to support a determination that a person is of unsound mind or lacks the capacity to do a certain act." Instead, California law requires evidence of specific deficits and a link between the identified deficits and the acts that the allegedly incompetent person would otherwise have capacity to perform. The types of deficiencies are outlined in § 811 as follows:

Alertness and attention, including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Level of arousal or consciousness.
2. Orientation to time, place, person, and situation.
3. Ability to attend and concentrate.
Information processing, including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Short- and long-term memory, including immediate recall.
2. Ability to understand or communicate with others, either verbally or otherwise.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Charles E. Hurd and Gracie Hurd
3. Recognition of familiar objects and familiar persons.
4. Ability to understand and appreciate quantities.
5. Ability to reason using abstract concepts.
  
  Chapter 7
6. Ability to plan, organize, and carry out actions in one's own rational self-interest.
7. Ability to reason logically.
Thought processes. Deficits in these functions may be demonstrated by the presence of the following:
1. Severely disorganized thinking.
2. Hallucinations.
3. Delusions.
4. Uncontrollable, repetitive, or intrusive thoughts.
Ability to modulate mood and affect. Deficits in this ability may be demonstrated by the presence of a pervasive and persistent or recurrent state of euphoria, anger, anxiety, fear, panic, depression, hopelessness or despair, helplessness, apathy or indifference, that is inappropriate in degree to the individual's circumstances.

Charles’s declaration does not contain the requisite detail necessary to satisfy the standard for appointment of a next friend.

Additionally, there are a variety of questions raised by the motion and evidence presented.

First, it would appear that any mental debilitation is a side effect of pain medication. Nevertheless, there is no evidence regarding how often Gracie is intended to take medication, or what exactly "incoherent most of time" means. If the situation is such that Gracie has been incoherent the entire two years since the fall occurred, then further detail should be submitted to the Court.

Second, the doctor’s note provided does not address any mental deficiencies whatsoever. In addition, it is not clear whether the doctor’s restriction on "travel" is strict enough to prevent attendance at a meeting of creditors. Finally, the change of address filed by Debtors indicates that Debtors moved from California to Ohio in July

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charles E. Hurd and Gracie Hurd

Chapter 7

2018, the same month the doctor wrote that Gracie should not travel for approximately one year.

Third, the Court notes that Debtors have not complied with the Court’s instructions regarding this hearing. Specifically, the Court notes that its instructions stated: "[t]he Court will require a declaration from the Doctor laying a foundation for his diagnosis." Such a declaration was not filed, and the supplement which was filed, two days before the hearing, was neither authenticated nor instructive. Additionally, the Court notes that while its instructions provided for a hearing date of October 24, 2018, Debtors waited ten days to set the matter for hearing, providing relatively short notice of this hearing.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion without prejudice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Charles E. Hurd Represented By Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Joint Debtor(s):

Gracie Hurd Represented By

Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Movant(s):

Charles E. Hurd Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charles E. Hurd and Gracie Hurd

Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed Craig K Streed

Chapter 7

Gracie Hurd Represented By

Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed

Trustee(s):

Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7 #12.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Bankruptcy Case From: 10/17/18

Also #13 EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 10, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy ("Motion"). A notice of Non-opposition was filed by Lui Bin on the same date.

Opposition to the Motion was filed by Luczynski and the Trustee on October 3, 2018 (the "Oppositions"). The Debtor filed an Omnibus Reply to the Oppositions on October 10, 2018 ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

The Debtor seeks dismissal pursuant to § 305(a)(1). Section 305(a)(1)

Chapter 7

provides as follows:

The court, after notice and a hearing, may dismiss a case under this title, or may suspend all proceedings in a case under this title, at any time if—

(1) the interests of creditors and the debtor would be better served by such dismissal or suspension;

11 U.S.C. § 305(a)(1); In re Eastman, 188 B.R. 621, 625 (9th Cir. BAP 1995). The

courts that have construed § 305(a)(1) are in general agreement that abstention in a properly filed bankruptcy case is an extraordinary remedy, and that dismissal is appropriate under § 305(a)(1) only in the situation where the court finds that both "creditors and the debtor" would be "better served" by a dismissal. Id. (internal citations omitted). The legislative history uses the following example of such a situation:

an arrangement is being worked out by creditors and the debtor out of court, there is no prejudice to the rights of creditors in that arrangement, and an involuntary case has been commenced by a few recalcitrant creditors to provide a basis for future threats to extract full payment.

H.R.Rep. No. 95–595, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 325 (1977); 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963,

6281.

As the statutory language and legislative history demonstrate, the test under § 305(a) is not whether dismissal would give rise to a substantial prejudice to the debtor. Nor is the test whether a balancing process favors dismissal. Rather, the test is whether both the debtor and the creditors would be "better served" by a dismissal.

In support of the Motion, the Debtor argues that (1) Luczynski will suffer no prejudice from dismissal of the case because the amended complaint filed in the State Action dismissed the Debtor from the complaint; (2) Creditor Lui Bin will be paid in full; (3) the only parties benefitting from continuation of the case are the Trustee and his professionals. Although the Debtor has seemingly been dismissed from the underlying State Court litigation, the State Action retains allegations that the Debtor is an alter ego of the named defendant, Liu. (Roman Decl. ¶ 2).

The Oppositions essentially assert that (1) Luczynski has filed a proof of claim

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

that constitutes prima facie evidence of a claim; and (2) avoidable insider payments have been discovered that will benefit the Debtor’s creditors.

On the current record, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. Here, assuming (as the Court must at this juncture) that Luczynski may have an enforceable claim against the Debtor’s estate, dismissal is likely to result in plain legal prejudice to Luczynski because the Debtor and its principal/sole shareholder seek to payoff the only other unsecured creditor in full in order to force a dismissal. The Debtor’s strategy is a transparent violation of the bankruptcy code’s command that similarly situated creditors must be treated similarly. Additionally, the Court is unconvinced that the dismissal of the Debtor from the underlying State Court Action is a sufficient basis to find that the Debtor has no remaining liability to Luczynski. In fact, the Debtor’s evidence confirms that Luczynski’s complaint continues to argue that the Debtor and Liu are alter egos. For now, the Court agrees with the Trustee and Luczynski that dismissal would be premature at this point.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Debtor has not met its burden of demonstrating that both the Debtor and creditors will be "better served" by dismissal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Movant(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7

11:00 AM

6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7 #13.00 Motion to Disallow Claims Disallowing Claim No. 1 of Andrzej Luczynski Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502

Also #12 EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Movant(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe

Thomas J Eastmond

11:00 AM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7 #14.00 CONT Trustees Motion For Entry Of An Order: (A) Approving Sale Of Real Property Free And Clear Of Certain Liens Or Interests; (B) Approving Overbid Procedures; (C) Approving The Carve-Out And Disbursements Of Sale Proceeds; And (D) Granting Related Relief

From: 9/26/18 EH

Docket 121

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:09-01235 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#15.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

David Loughnot

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Chapter 7

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K. DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried

Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur

Trustee(s):

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:10-01319 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#16.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

01/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Chapter 7

James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Larry Day Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Neil M Miller Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Paul Roman Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett

Peter T. Healy Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Peter M Bransten

Michael I Gottfried Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder Cynthia M Cohen

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Empire Land, LLC

Roye Zur

Chapter 7

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:10-01329 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#17.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

(Defendant - Empire Partners, Inc) HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Chapter 7

James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Previti Realty Fund, L.P. Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

The James Previti Family Trust Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried

Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur

Trustee(s):

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al

#18.00 Pre-Trial Conference Re: Amended Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason; 68- Dischargeability - 523(a)(6) Willful and Malicious Injury

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/18 AT 2:00PM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Joint Debtor(s):

Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Plaintiff(s):

Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:16-13096

Tarek El Sayed Ayoub

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01219 Candee et al v. Ayoub et al

#19.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Keith H Candee, Original Thurber Ranch LLC against Tarek El Sayed Ayoub, Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub

From: 11/1/16, 6/7/17, 1/24/18, 1/31/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy

Defendant(s):

Tarek El Sayed Ayoub Represented By Todd L Turoci

Gabriela VIlleda Ayoub Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Gabriela Villeda Ayoub Represented By Sherif Fathy

Plaintiff(s):

Keith H Candee Represented By Jon H Lieberg

Original Thurber Ranch LLC Represented By Jon H Lieberg

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Tarek El Sayed Ayoub

Chapter 7

Wesley H Avery (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman

Chapter 13 #20.00 CONT Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11 by Claimant Natasha Reynoso and Mark Reynoso

HOLDING DATE

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 7/11/18

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman

Chapter 13

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#21.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (Third Amended Complaint) From: 8/2/18

Also #22 & #23 EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 12, 2016, Douglas and Anne Goodman (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Defendants’ second motion to dismiss at a hearing on May 4, 2017. On June 5, 2017, the Defendants filed their Answer to the FAC ("Answer").

On March 9, 2018, the Defendants moved to dismiss the April 19, 2018, complaint. The Court granted the motion to dismiss the April 19, 2018, complaint with leave to amend. A second amended complaint was then filed on May 23, 2018 (the "SAC"). [Note: there is a dispute regarding whether the operative complaint is a second or third amended complaint due to the filing of the "corrected complaint" indicated above. For purposes of this hearing, the operative complaint is Docket No. 93]. Defendants now move to dismiss the SAC. No opposition has been filed by the Plaintiffs.

DISCUSSION

As a threshold matter, the Motion seeks relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).

However, given that the Defendants have filed an Answer to the FAC, the Court shall construe the Motion as a motion under Rule 12(c), a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Civil Rule 12(c) standard

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

v. Reich, 13 F.3d 1370, 1377 (9th Cir.1994)).

The crux of Defendants’ argument for dismissal of the FAC is that Plaintiffs have not set forth the basis for a money judgment under state law. In the Court’s tentative ruling on the motion to dismiss the FAC, the Court stated the following:

Nonetheless, Plaintiffs should not have to guess at the state law basis of the debt for a money judgment.

Here, the SAC has added bases for calculation of damages under state law but has still not set forth the state law basis for the monetary judgment.

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman

Party Information

Chapter 13

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#22.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [13] Amended Complaint by Michael J Hemming on behalf of Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:16-ap-01277. Complaint by Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Douglas Edward Goodman, Anne Louise Goodman. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) filed by Plaintiff Mark & Natasha Reynoso)

(Holding Date)

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 7/11/18

Also #21 & #23 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#23.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [26] Crossclaim by Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman against all defendants

From: 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 7/11/18

Also #21 & #22 EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Samer A Nahas Edward T Weber

Chapter 13

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01035 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson

#24.00 CONT Status Conference re Notice of Removal RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18- ap-01035. Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua C Richardson. Case No. RIC 1700456]; Attachments: # 1 Notice of Status Conference re Removal of Action Nature of Suit: 01 - Determination of removed claim or cause

From: 3/28/18, 6/13/18, 7/25/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Defendant(s):

Joshua C Richardson Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By Laila Masud

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

2:00 PM

6:17-19010

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01020 SCE Federal Credit Union v. Durham

#25.00 Motion to Strike Defendant's Answer and Enter Default Also #26

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

10/24/18

BACKGROUND

On October 30, 2017, Sara Durham ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 8, 2018, SCE Federal Credit Union ("Plaintiff") filed a non- dischargeability complaint against Debtor. On February 8, 2018, Debtor filed her answer to the complaint.

On May 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel Debtor to respond to discovery. The Court granted the motion pursuant to an order entered June 6, 2018.

On September 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike the answer of Debtor and for entry of default. The basis for Plaintiff’s motion is (1) Debtor’s failure to appear at either status conference in this case; (2) Debtor’s failure to participate in the drafting of a status report for either status conference; (3) Debtor’s failure to respond in any way to the discovery requests originally propounded on February 27, 2018; (4) Debtor’s continued failure to respond to discovery after the Court entered an order compelling her response; and (5) Debtor’s failure to pay $1,013.50 in sanctions that

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

were ordered against her to reimburse Plaintiff for bringing a motion to compel.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 37(b)(2)(A), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7037, states:

If a party or a party’s officer, director, or managing agent – or a witness designated under Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a)(4) – fails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery, including an order under Rule 26(f), 35, or 37(a), the court where the action is pending may issue further just orders. They may include the following:
1. directing that the matter embraced in the order or other designated facts be taken as established for purposes of the action, as the prevailing party claims;
2. prohibiting the disobedient party from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses, or from introducing designated matters in evidence;
3. striking pleadings in whole or in part;
4. staying further proceedings until the order is obeyed;
5. dismissing the action or proceeding in whole or in part;
6. rendering a default judgment against the disobedient party;
7. treating as contempt of court the failure to obey any order except an order to submit to a physical or mental examination.

Furthermore, FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 37(d)(3) permits the Court to order the above listed

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

sanctions in response to a party’s failure to attend its own deposition, serve answers to interrogatories, or respond to a request for inspection.

Here, Plaintiffs have adequately established that Debtor has failed to participate in this case in any meaningful way. Based on Debtor’s continued failure to cooperate in discovery or the preparation of status reports, and Debtor’s failure to attend any hearing in this, and noting the lack of opposition to the instant motion, the Court is inclined to strike Debtor’s answer. Regarding Plaintiffs’ request that the Court enter default against Debtor, once Debtor’s answer is stricken, the Plaintiff may follow the normal procedures for seeking entry of default and a default judgment.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent of STRIKING Debtor’s Answer.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sara Durham Represented By

Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Sara Durham Pro Se

Movant(s):

SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By

Bruce P. Needleman

2:00 PM

CONT...

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By

Bruce P. Needleman

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-19010

Sara Durham

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01020 SCE Federal Credit Union v. Durham

#26.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by SCE Federal Credit Union against Sara Durham. (14 ),(14A) priority tax claims)), 62 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud

From: 3/21/18, 6/27/18, 8/22/18 Also #25

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sara Durham Represented By

Edgar P Lombera

Defendant(s):

Sara Durham Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

SCE Federal Credit Union Represented By

Bruce P. Needleman

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#27.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01123. Complaint by First Home Bank against Sean Karadas. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))(Kastan, Joshua)

From: 7/25/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Sean Karadas Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe

Thomas J Eastmond

2:00 PM

6:18-10208

Rolando Carlos Reyes

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01117 Pringle v. Reyes

#28.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01117. Complaint by John P. Pringle against Reginald Reyes. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). with Proof of Service Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)),(11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property)) (Iskander, Brandon)

From: 7/25/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rolando Carlos Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Defendant(s):

Reginald Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Joint Debtor(s):

Florencia Aquino Reyes Represented By Walter Scott

Plaintiff(s):

John P. Pringle Represented By Brandon J Iskander

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rolando Carlos Reyes

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander

Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP

11:00 AM

6:14-19913

Martin Caballero and Clementina Caballero

Chapter 13 #1.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments (re: increased income)

Docket 127

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Martin Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres

Joint Debtor(s):

Clementina Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres

Movant(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17605

Joseph N Duguay, II

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion to Avoid Lien U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

10/25/2018

The Court having reviewed the motion, and noting the lack of opposition, is inclined to GRANT the motion, avoiding the junior lien of U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. as trustee upon completion of the Chapter 13 plan.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph N Duguay II Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Movant(s):

Joseph N Duguay II Represented By Andy C Warshaw Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17008

Michael R Fink

Chapter 13 #3.00 Motion By United States Trustee To Dismiss Chapter 13 Case with A Re-filing Bar

Also #4 EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

10/25/18

BACKGROUND

On August 20, 2018, Michael Fink ("Debtor") filed a skeletal Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Debtor had previously filed bankruptcies in November 1998, November 2011, January 2012, May 2016, and September 2017, all of which were dismissed for failure to file information or failure to appear at the meeting of creditors. On September 12, 2018, UST filed a motion to dismiss case, requesting a one-year re- filing bar.

DISCUSSION

Dismissal

11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1) permits the Court to dismiss a Chapter 7 case for abuse. 11 U.S.C.
§ 707(b)(3)(A) states:
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael R Fink

Chapter 13
1. In considering under paragraph (1) whether the granting of relief would be an abuse of the provisions of this chapter in a case in which the presumption in paragraph (2)(A)(i) does not arise or is rebutted, the court shall consider –
  1. whether the debtor filed the petition in bad faith
In determining whether a case should be dismissed under § 707(b)(3)(A), the Court considers the totality of the circumstances, but is ultimately instructed to consider whether "the debtor’s intention in filing a bankruptcy petition is inconsistent with the Chapter 7 goals of providing a ‘fresh start’ to debtors and maximizing the return to creditors." In re Mitchell, 357 B.R. 142, 154-55 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2006) (listing factors to be considered in making that determination).

The majority of the Mitchell factors are inapplicable when, as here, a debtor files a skeletal petition that does not provide the Court with sufficient information to apply the Mitchell test. Only factor seven (history of bankruptcy filings) and, possibly, factor nine (egregious behavior) can be assessed when a debtor files a skeletal petition. Both those factors weigh in favor of dismissal when, as here, a debtor repeatedly files skeletal petitions during a short period of time, and does not disclose previous filings.1 While § 707(a)(1) and (3) provide for dismissal when a debtor fails to fulfill his duties under the Bankruptcy Code, when a debtor repeatedly files bankruptcy and fails to evince any attempt to comply with the filing requirements, it can be inferred, absent any indication to the contrary, that the debtor’s purpose in filing bankruptcy is not to take advantage of the fresh start. See, e.g., In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648, 655 (Bankr.
N.D. Cal. 2007) ("Courts generally hold that when a debtor repeatedly files bankruptcy petitions and then repeatedly fails to file schedules or to comply with other requirements, this pattern of behavior is evidence of bad faith and an attempt to abuse the system."). Dismissal under § 707(b)(3) is appropriate in those circumstances.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael R Fink
Re-Filing Bar

Chapter 13

The court is empowered to impose a refiling bar under 11 U.S.C. § 349(a). As COLLIER notes, courts’ analysis of this section is somewhat confused due to confounding "dismissal with prejudice" with "dismissal with injunction against future filings." COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 349.02[3]; compare In re Garcia, 479 B.R. 488 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2012) (denying motion for dismissal with prejudice, but imposing three-year refiling bar) with In re Craighead, 377 B.R. 648 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2007) (appearing to equate dismissal with prejudice with an injunction against refiling).

There is also a circuit split concerning whether an injunction on refiling for more than 180 days is allowed under the Bankruptcy Code. Compare In re Frieouf, 938 F.2d 1099 (10th Cir. 1991) (180 days is maximum allowed length of refiling injunction) with Casse v. Key Bank Nat. Ass’n, 198 F.3d 327 (2nd Cir. 1999) (injunction against filing for more than 180 days permissible). 11 U.S.C. § 349(a) reads:

Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise, the dismissal of a case under this title does not bar the discharge, in a later case under this title, of debts that were dischargeable in the case dismissed; nor does the dismissal of a case under this title prejudice the debtor with regard to the filing of a subsequent petition under this title, except as provided in section 109(g) of this title.

The disagreement revolves around whether the qualifier "Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise" modifies the content after the semi-colon. In re Leavitt noted this disagreement, but since the court was dealing with a dismissal with prejudice, rather than an injunction against refiling, it did not resolve the issue. 209 B.R. 935, 942 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997). Within the Ninth Circuit, it appears the trend is to adopt the reasoning of the Second Circuit and allow injunctions for more than 180 days. See e.g. In re Velasques, 2012 WL 8255582 at *3 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2012).

Here, Debtor has filed five previous bankruptcies which were all summarily dismissed, and, in the instant case, failed to file the balance of the schedules. As noted above, the Court has determined that Debtor’s behavior is sufficient to warrant dismissal for bad faith and the Court finds the requested one-year refiling bar to be appropriate.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Michael R Fink

Chapter 13

Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose is deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, dismissing the case and imposing a re- filing bar of one year.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michael R Fink Pro Se

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17008

Michael R Fink

Chapter 13 #4.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Also #3 EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael R Fink Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Make Plan Payments to dismiss case and/or for order determining Milestone's debt is not subject to Debtor's plan or modification of plan

Also #6 EH

Docket 59

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Movant(s):

Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13 #6.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 150 W. Highland Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: MILESTONE FINANCIAL LLC

From: 9/25/18, 10/18/18 Also #5

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

11:00 AM

CONT...

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13

Court notes that the docket does not reflect that a motion to dismiss for delinquency has been filed in this case, Debtor has not provided any supporting documentation indicating that the Chapter 13 plan payments are current.

Parties to discuss status of Chapter 13 plan payments and whether funds have been received by Movant and/or its loan servicer, Del Toro Loan Servicing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez

Movant(s):

Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16681

Melissa Cheryl Ron

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melissa Cheryl Ron Represented By Nima S Vokshori

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16792

Richard Steward

Chapter 13 #8.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/31/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Richard Steward Represented By Jamil L White

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16804

Adam Brian Britt and Kenya Lashawn Britt

Chapter 13 #9.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adam Brian Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Joint Debtor(s):

Kenya Lashawn Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13 #10.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16815

Javier Ortega

Chapter 13 #11.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

Juan Manuel Barragan Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.

Joint Debtor(s):

Yazmeen Nicole Barragan Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16856

Jason Wade Trust and Shontay Leanne Trust

Chapter 13 #15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jason Wade Trust Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Joint Debtor(s):

Shontay Leanne Trust Represented By Benjamin R Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16857

Scott R Moore

Chapter 13 #16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/4/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Scott R Moore Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16862

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng and Christine Achieng Matoka

Chapter 13 #17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/4/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Christine Achieng Matoka Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16868

John Morris and Cassandra Morris

Chapter 13 #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

John Morris Represented By

Julie J Villalobos

Joint Debtor(s):

Cassandra Morris Represented By Julie J Villalobos

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16892

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo

Chapter 13 #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo Represented By Marcella Lucente

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16910

Humberto Camacho, Jr and Sarah Camacho

Chapter 13 #20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/4/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Humberto Camacho Jr Represented By Christian N. Cooper

Joint Debtor(s):

Sarah Camacho Represented By Christian N. Cooper

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16932

Olivia Lopez

Chapter 13 #21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jaime Rodriguez Represented By Robert W Ripley

Joint Debtor(s):

Amy Lynn Rodriguez Represented By Robert W Ripley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16978

Leanne Diaz

Chapter 13 #25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/18/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Leanne Diaz Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16983

Lakendra Johnson

Chapter 13 #26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lakendra Johnson Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16996

Gabriel Cruz

Chapter 13 #27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Gabriel Cruz Represented By

Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17000

James K. Bingham and Lisa D. Bingham

Chapter 13 #28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

James K. Bingham Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa D. Bingham Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17003

Jose Gacho Ruidera, Jr. and Maria Genalyn Raneses

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Justo Ocegueda Represented By Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17054

Todd Kenneth Brothers and Rubi Zelena Brothers

Chapter 13 #33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Todd Kenneth Brothers Represented By Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Rubi Zelena Brothers Represented By Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17079

Ronald A Carter

Chapter 13 #34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Ronald A Carter Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17109

Bryant Douglas Nevitt

Chapter 13 #35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Bryant Douglas Nevitt Represented By Marc A Duxbury

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17117

Brandon Scott Jones and Lizette Rosita Jones

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Robert Shanks Represented By David L Nelson

Joint Debtor(s):

Kimberly J Shanks Represented By David L Nelson

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#40.00 Motion to vacate (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No. 6:17-ap-01187 MH, which is a Conflict of Interest; (3) Request for an Accounting and Claim Numbers on any Unsecured Debts Rule 71 in Adversary Proceeding Case No 6:17-ap-01187 MH and Chapter 13 Case No 6:16-bk-16720 MH; (4) Memorandum of Points and Authorities; (5) Declaration of Luevina Henry

Docket 110

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #41.00 Motion to (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No. 6:17-ap-01187 MH, which is a Conflict of Interest; (3) Request for an Accounting and Claim Numbers on any Unsecured Debts Rule 71 in Adversary Proceeding Case No 6:17-ap-01187 MH and Chapter 13 Case No 6:16-bk-16720 MH; (4) Memorandum of Points and Authorities; (5) Declaration of Luevina Henry

Also #42 EH

Docket 187

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #42.00 Order to show cause why order granting application for compensation (Docket No. 174) should not be vacated

Also #41 EH

Docket 191

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-18349

Fabiola Adame

Chapter 13 #43.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18

Docket 179

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fabiola Adame Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-23150

Vivian Munson

Chapter 13 #44.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18

Docket 218

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vivian Munson Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-16637

Martin D Woods and Shante L Woods

Chapter 13 #45.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/27/18

Docket 94

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Martin D Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Shante L Woods Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-20133

Deborah Catherine Hamernik

Chapter 13 #46.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 9/13/18

Docket 68

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-10460

Julio Cesar Cacho and Rosalie Ann Cacho

Chapter 13 #47.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Julio Cesar Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Rosalie Ann Cacho Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-12118

Veronica A Mendoza

Chapter 13 #48.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Veronica A Mendoza Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14619

Candice Maria Borrego

Chapter 13 #49.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 53

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pamela Ann Harris Represented By Halli B Heston

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13 #55.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/27/18

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-12819

Adrian Lopez and Patricia Lopez

Chapter 13 #56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adrian Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Lopez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#57.00 Emergency Motion To Continue Date For Production Of Documents Subpoenaed By Plaintiff On MUFG Union Bank, N.A. And U.S. Bank, N.A.

Docket 88

* VACATED * REASON: MOTION NOT FILED

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Trustee(s):

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

1:00 PM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7 #58.00 CONT Trustees Motion For Entry Of An Order: (A) Approving Sale Of Real Property Free And Clear Of Certain Liens Or Interests; (B) Approving Overbid Procedures; (C) Approving The Carve-Out And Disbursements Of Sale Proceeds; And (D) Granting Related Relief

From: 9/26/18, 10/24/18 EH

Docket 121

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

10:00 AM

6:13-28594

Jimmy Radu Vianu and Milagros Vianu

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Jeep Patriot

MOVANT: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A.

Docket 81

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

Service is proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jimmy Radu Vianu Represented By Andrew Nguyen

Joint Debtor(s):

Milagros Vianu Represented By Andrew Nguyen

Movant(s):

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Represented By Joseph M Pleasant

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:14-18349

Fabiola Adame

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 795 West Arrow Highway, Upland, CA 91786

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA N.A.

From: 10/16/18 EH

Docket 180

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of adequate protection discussions, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fabiola Adame Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Movant(s):

HSBC BANK USA Represented By Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-20006

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13 #3.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 483 Grapevine Dr, Corona CA 92882

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

From: 4/24/18, 5/29/18, 7/31/18 EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:

Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carl J Charlot Represented By

Michael A Younge

Joint Debtor(s):

Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By April Harriott Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:15-20153

Rama Cokrohadian Suhari

Chapter 13 #4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Hyundai Elantra, VIN: KMHDH4AE5DU631848

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request to lift § 1301 co-debtor stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rama Cokrohadian Suhari Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Movant(s):

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. d/b/a Wells Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:16-12129

Malek Boshra Abdelmalek

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 40231 Banyan St., Murrieta, CA 92563

MOVANT: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC

Docket 39

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to update the Court regarding the progress of APO discussions. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Malek Boshra Abdelmalek Represented By Carey C Pickford

Movant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Brett P Ryan Jason C Kolbe Christina J O

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-13649

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Chapter 7 #6.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 231 Arden Street, Hemet, CA 92543

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

From: 7/31/18 EH

Docket 75

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/8/19 AT 10:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Fernando Fabrigas Sr. Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Joint Debtor(s):

Estela F. Fabrigas Represented By

R Creig Greaves Kevin Tang

Movant(s):

FREEDOM MORTGAGE Represented By Jason C Kolbe Nancy L Lee

Trustee(s):

Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Lynda T Bui Brandon J Iskander

10:00 AM

CONT...

Fernando Fabrigas, Sr. and Estela F. Fabrigas

Rika Kido

Chapter 7

10:00 AM

6:17-14908

Joan Eleanor Demiany

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1055 East Via Colusa, Palm Springs, CA 92262

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

From: 9/11/18 EH

Docket 35

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

The Movant submitted evidence that the Debtor is delinquent in the amount of

$30,303.59, having missed 10 postconfirmation payments. The parties stipulated toa continuance of the hearing from September 11, 2018 to this date. The primary basis of opposition appears to be regarding the status of a loan modification application.

Parties to update the Court.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joan Eleanor Demiany Represented By Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By

Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13 #8.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 22424 Tanager Street, Grand Terrace, CA 92313

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

From: 6/6/18, 9/11/18 EH

Docket 59

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:

09/11/18

Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for relief from the co-debtor stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and GRANT order designating Debtor as "borrower" under Cal. Civil Code § 2920.5. DENY request pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown and DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Gehrig Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By

Sean C Ferry

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-15893

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Chevrolet Cruze, VIN 1G1BE5SM3G7250074

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC

From: 9/25/18, 10/16/18 EH

Docket 36

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/23/18

Tentative Ruling:

9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz Represented By April E Roberts

Joint Debtor(s):

Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Joseph Manuel Ruiz and Shannon Elizabeth Ruiz

April E Roberts

Chapter 13

Americredit Financial Services, Inc., Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-13172

Michelle Cadena Quinn

Chapter 13 #10.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3656 N. Valley Court, San Bernardino, CA 92407

MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION From: 6/13/18, 8/28/18, 9/11/18, 10/16/18

Docket 10

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michelle Cadena Quinn Represented By Steven A Alpert

Movant(s):

Seterus, Inc. as the authorized Represented By Nichole Glowin

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16634

Enoch Young

Chapter 7 #11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Nissan Sentra (3N1AB7AP1FY329424)

MOVANT: VEROS CREDIT LLC

Docket 21

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Enoch Young Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Movant(s):

Veros Credit, LLC Represented By Robert M Tennant

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17258

Harold Lundy and Clare Ann Lundy

Chapter 7 #12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 28942 Via La Espalda, Murrieta

MOVANT: POSITIVE INVESTMENT

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Harold Lundy Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Clare Ann Lundy Pro Se

Movant(s):

Positive Investment, Inc. Represented By Helen G Long

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17468

Christopher Joseph Bluitt

Chapter 7 #13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2007 Chevrolet Suburban, VIN 3GNFC16047G183379

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/18

Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY APO request as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Christopher Joseph Bluitt Represented By Michael E Clark

Movant(s):

Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17797

Susan Violet Guillot

Chapter 13 #14.00 Motion in individual case for order imposing a stay or continuing the automatic stay as the court deems appropriate

MOVANT: SUSAN VIOLET GUILLOT

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

The instant case was filed within one year of the dismissal of the Debtor’s prior case, Case No. 17-15347. Thus, the Debtor must seek to continue the stay pursuant to § 362(c)(3). The language of § 362(c)(3) plainly states that the Court cannot extend the stay until "after notice and hearing completed before the expiration of the 30-day period". Here, the 30-day period expired on October 14, 2018. The Court has no authority to extend the stay. The Motion must be DENIED.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Gary S Saunders

Movant(s):

Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Gary S Saunders

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-18326

Louise Laster

Chapter 13 #15.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 13564 Ranier Ave., Corona, CA 92880

MOVANT: LOUISE LASTER

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

The Motion seeks to continue the stay as to all creditors, including Bayview, the servicer as to mortgage payments on the Debtor’s primary residence. First, the proof of service indicates that the Debtor failed to serve any creditors other than Bayview the Motion is denied as to any creditors other than Bayview. As to Bayview, the Debtor has provided sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption that the case was not filed in good faith.

The hearing was set on regular notice and no opposition has been filed. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as to Bayview and DENY as to all other creditors.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Louise Laster Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

Louise Laster Represented By

Neil R Hedtke

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Louise Laster

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-18504

Elmer Arnold Tompkins

Chapter 13 #16.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate

MOVANT: ELMER TOMPKINS

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

10/30/2018

The Debtor has provided sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption that the case was not filed in good faith. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Elmer Arnold Tompkins Represented By Scott Kosner

Movant(s):

Elmer Arnold Tompkins Represented By Scott Kosner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01109 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Titanium Resource Company,

#17.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 - preference,13 Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer

From: 7/10/18, 8/21/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Titanium Resource Company, Inc., a Represented By

Alan W Forsley

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01110 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Larson, D.C., an individual

#18.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against John Larson, D.C., an individual. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers, Avoidance of Improper Distributions, and Unjust Enrichment and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 13- Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer

From: 7/10/18, 8/21/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

John Larson, D.C., an individual Represented By

Alan W Forsley

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01111 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. American Express Company, a

#19.00 CONT Status Conference RE: 3rd Party Complaint [4] Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint, and Third-Party Claim Against John C. Larson, Third-Party Complaint by American Express Company, a New York Corporation dba American Express, American Express Travel Related Services, Inc., a New York corporation dba American Express against John C. Larson

From: 8/21/18 Also #20

Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

American Express Company, a New Pro Se American Express Travel Related Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth Mark S Horoupian

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01111 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. American Express Company, a

#20.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01111. Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against American Express Company, a New York Corporation dba American Express, American Express Travel Related Services, Inc., a New York corporation dba American Express. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers, Recovery of Transferred Property or Value Thereof, Preservation of Avoided Transfers and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) (Werth, Steven)

From: 7/10/18, 8/21/18 Also #19

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

American Express Company, a New Pro Se American Express Travel Related Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Mark S Horoupian

Chapter 11

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

2:00 PM

6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

Adv#: 6:18-01113 David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Netreva, Inc., a California

#21.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01113. Complaint by David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Trustee against Netreva, Inc., a California corporation. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for Avoidance and Recovery of Preferential Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b), 550 and 551 and Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)) (Werth, Steven)

From: 7/10/18, 8/21/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley

Defendant(s):

Netreva, Inc., a California Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez

Plaintiff(s):

David M. Goodrich, Chapter 11 Represented By Steven Werth

Trustee(s):

David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer

2:00 PM

CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #22.00 CONT Application for Compensation and Notice of Hearing with Proof of Service for Todd L Turoci, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/2/2017 to 9/17/2018, Fee:

$164280.00, Expenses: $7207.77. (Turoci, Todd) From: 10/16/18

Also #23 - #24

Docket 414

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci

2:00 PM

6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11 #23.00 Motion of CIT Group, Inc. for Allowance and Payment of Its Administrative Expense Claim

Also #22 - #24

Docket 421

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#25.00 CONT Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint Against Chapter 7 Trustee From: 9/4/18

Also #26 EH

Docket 14

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Defendant(s):

Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se

Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By

Monica Y Kim

Movant(s):

Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By

Monica Y Kim

Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By

Monica Y Kim

Plaintiff(s):

Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

2:00 PM

6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#26.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01105. Complaint by Joana Johnson against Vance Zachary Johnson, Goe & Forsythe, LLP. (61 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(5), domestic support)) (Talkov, Scott)

From: 7/10/18, 9/12/18 Also #25

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe

Defendant(s):

Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se

Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By

Monica Y Kim

Plaintiff(s):

Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim

2:00 PM

6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11 #27.00 Motion for Valuation of Collateral EH

Docket 80

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rick's Patio Inc Represented By

Robert B Rosenstein

Movant(s):

Rick's Patio Inc Represented By

Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein Robert B Rosenstein

2:00 PM

6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11 #28.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 9/11/18, 9/25/18

Also #29 EH

Docket 45

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/6/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

Movant(s):

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

2:00 PM

6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11 #29.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 5/8/18, 8/21/18, 9/11/18, 9/25/18 Also #28

Docket 18

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/6/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd

2:00 PM

6:18-17533

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11 #30.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 10/2/18 EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt

2:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #31.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1778 Carr Rd Ste 4A, Calexico, CA 92231

MOVANT: PACIFIC RIM DISTRIBUTION CENTER LLC

Also #32 EH

Docket 47

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/13/18 AT 10:00 AM

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Pacific Rim Distribution Center, Represented By

Kurt Rifbjerg

2:00 PM

6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11 #32.00 CONT Emergency motion Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Emergency Motion for Order (a) Prohibiting Utilities From Altering, Refusing, or Discontinuing Service; and (b) Deeming Utilities Adequate Assured of Future Performance Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 366

From: 10/5/18 Also #31

Docket 2

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By

Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #33.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order Authorizing The Debtor To Keep Two Pre- Petition Bank Accounts Open For The Sole Purpose of Accepting Electronic Deposits

(FINAL HEARING)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18 Also #34 - #37

Docket 9

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/29/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente

Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #34.00 CONT Patient Care Ombudsman's Emergency Motion for Order Approving Review of Confidential Patient Records Under § 333, and Approving Notice to Patients Under Bankruptcy Rule 2015.1(b)

From: 10/2/18 Also #33 - #37

Docket 75

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/13/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente

Movant(s):

Jerry Seelig Represented By

Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #35.00 Application to Employ Perkins Coie LLP as Counsel to Patient Care Ombudsman Retroactive to September 13, 2018

Also #33 - #37

Docket 97

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/13/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente

Movant(s):

Jerry Seelig Represented By

Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #36.00 Application to Employ Seelig+Cussigh HCO LLC as Consultant to Patient Care Ombudsman Retroactive to September 13, 2018

Also #33 - #37

Docket 101

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/13/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente

Movant(s):

Jerry Seelig Represented By

Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman

2:00 PM

6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11 #37.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18 Also #33 - #36

Docket 4

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/13/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By

David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente

10:00 AM

6:18-14982

Audrey Yasui-Iwata

Chapter 7 #1.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Wescom Central Credit Union re 2014 Nissan Rogue

From: 10/17/18 EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Audrey Yasui-Iwata Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-11368

Cynthia Higl

Chapter 7 #2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:

10/31/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 185.50 Trustee Expenses: $ 19.96

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Cynthia Higl Represented By

Jonathan R Preston

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-12748

William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez

Chapter 7 #3.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 141

Tentative Ruling:

10/31/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

Trustee Fees:	$ 10,500
Trustee Expenses:	$ 120.90
Attorney Fees:	$46,289.90
Attorney Costs:	$2,776.59

The applications for compensation are approved and the trustee and associated professionals may submit on the tentative. Additionally, pursuant to the Court’s Order Authorizing payment to the tax preparer, the Court approves the fee of $1,000 paid to Donald Fife as well as amounts previously authorized for GlassRatner and Jack Pope’s services in connection with the marketing and auction of property of the estate.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William A. Mendez II Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

William A. Mendez, II and Shawna D. Mendez

Thomas J Polis

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Shawna D. Mendez Represented By Thomas J Polis

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Todd A Frealy Lindsey L Smith Carmela Pagay

11:00 AM

6:18-18457

Juan A Martinez

Chapter 13 #4.00 CONT Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate all property of the debtor

MOVANT: JUAN A MARTINEZ

From: 10/23/18 EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

10/23/2018

Service: Improper Opposition: None

The Court notes that Debtor has failed to serve the secured creditor pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7004, as required by this Court’s procedures.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz

Movant(s):

Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz Rebecca Tomilowitz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#5.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18, 8/22/18

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUE TO 11/14/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01309 Cisneros v. DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN

#6.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01309. Complaint by

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18, 8/22/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

DOUGLAS J. ROGER, M.D., INC. Represented By

Summer M Shaw

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#7.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Amended Complaint (First) by Revere Financial Corporation and Jerry Wang, as State-Court Appointed Receiver by Franklin R Fraley Jr on behalf of Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation against Revere Financial Corporation, a California corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-8)

From: 4/25/18, 6/13/18, 8/22/18 EH

Docket 82

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw Thomas J Eastmond

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Jerry Wang Represented By

Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano

A. Cisneros Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays

Chapter 7

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:18-12920

Jeffrey W Paradis

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01150 Discover Bank v. Paradis

#8.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01150. Complaint by Discover Bank against Jeffrey W Paradis.

From: 9/5/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeffrey W Paradis Represented By Daniel King

Defendant(s):

Jeffrey W Paradis Represented By Daniel King

Plaintiff(s):

Discover Bank Represented By Holly J Nolan

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-16417

Robert H Mills, III

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:17-01225 Liquid Capital Exchange, Inc. v. Mills, III

#9.00 Pre-Trial Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01225. Complaint by Liquid Capital Exchange, Inc. against Robert Harry Mills Jr.. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)) (Langley, Christopher)

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/30/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Robert H Mills III Represented By

Catherine Christiansen

Defendant(s):

Robert H. Mills III Represented By Todd L Turoci

Plaintiff(s):

Liquid Capital Exchange, Inc. Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#10.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)

(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Mina Farah against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18, 9/26/18 EH

Docket 5

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 10/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#11.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [5] Amended Complaint FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR NONDISCHARGEABILITY BASED ON 11 USC § 523(a)(2)

(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous. (Suojanen, Wayne)

From: 5/9/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18, 9/26/18 EH

Docket 5

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 10/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01063 Chen et al v. Bastorous et al

#12.00 CONT Status Conference re Amended Complaint by Douglas L Mahaffey on behalf of Chienan Chen, Chun-Wu Li against Bernadette Shenouda, 3 Columnar Ladera LLC, Mike Bareh, Mark Bastorous, MB Capital Group LLC.

From: 5/9/18, 6/6/18, 8/22/18 EH

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

3 Columnar Ladera LLC Pro Se

Mike Bareh Represented By

Mirco J Haag Jason E Goldstein

MB Capital Group LLC Pro Se

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Thomas F Nowland

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Chienan Chen Represented By Douglas L Mahaffey

Chun-Wu Li Represented By

Douglas L Mahaffey

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury

From: 5/9/18, 5/16/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Mona Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Rafet Gerges Represented By

Louis J Esbin

St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01174 Pringle Ch 7 Trustee v. Shenouda et al

#14.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01174. Complaint by John P Pringle Ch 7 Trustee against Violete Shenouda, Anwar Wagdy. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). Complaint: (1) To Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550; (2) To Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550; (3) To Avoid Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 544(a)(3); (4) To Preserve Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 551; (5) For Declaratory Relief; (6) For Imposition of Resulting Trust; (7) For Imposition of Constructive Trust; and (8) For Attorneys' Fees and Costs Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) (Goodrich, David)

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Violete Shenouda Represented By John J Lewis

Anwar Wagdy Represented By John J Lewis

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

John P Pringle Ch 7 Trustee Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01057 Whitson et al v. Bastorous

#15.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01057. Complaint by Blaine Whitson, Susan Whitson, Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Plan, Gurpaljit Deoll, Benny Winefeld, RM Holdings, LLC against Mark Bastorous. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury))

CASE DISMISSED 5/21/18

From: 5/9/18, 8/22/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Blaine Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Susan Whitson Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Union Home Loan Profit Sharing Represented By

Benjamin Taylor

Gurpaljit Deoll Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Benny Winefeld Represented By Benjamin Taylor

RM Holdings, LLC Represented By Benjamin Taylor

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

Thursday, November 1, 2018

Hearing Room

303

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#1.00 Status Conference on Complaint fld 8-25-17 - Dischargeability, willful and malicious injury, validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property, injunctive relief

From: 11/16/17 EH

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/6/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

9:30 AM

6:03-15174

Devore Stop A General Partners

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:12-01498 Morschauser v. Continental Capital LLC et al

#1.00 Evidentiary hearing re Order to Show Cause Why Jesse Bojorquez, American Business Investments, William Morschauser, Stephen Collias and Continental Capital, LLC, Should Not Be Sanctioned for Facilitating Payment to and/or Receiving Payment for Broker Services in Contravention of this Court's August 11, 2003, Sale Order

Docket 242

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/22/19 AT 9:30 AM

Party Information

Devore Stop A General Partners Represented By

Arshak Bartoumian - DISBARRED - Newton W Kellam

Devore Stop Represented By

Hutchison B Meltzer

Defendant(s):

Continental Capital LLC Represented By Cara J Hagan

Stephen Collias Represented By Cara J Hagan

Jesse Bojorquez Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman

Autumn D Spaeth ESQ

American Business Investments Represented By Lawrence J Kuhlman

Autumn D Spaeth ESQ

Mohammed Abdizadeh Pro Se

9:30 AM

CONT...

Devore Stop A General Partners

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

William G Morschauser Represented By Hutchison B Meltzer Reid A Winthrop

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-19067

Denise Valencia

Chapter 13 #1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 13820 Ellis Park Trail Eastvale, CA 92880

MOVANT: SHERRI SHAFIZADEH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Denise Valencia Pro Se

Movant(s):

Sherri S Shafizadeh Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-18478

Jose Granados and Norma Granados-Maycott

Chapter 13 #2.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 23919 Ridge Point Ct., Moreno Valley, CA 92557

MOVANT: JOSE GRANADOS AND NORMA GRANADOS-MAYCOTT

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/18

Service: Proper Opposition: None

The Court notes that Debtors did not serve counsel for the secured creditor which obtained relief from stay in the prior case. Further, Debtors state that relief from stay was obtained as a result of a medical diagnosis in February 2018, but the relief from stay order was entered in October 2017. Thus, the evidence presented is not clear and convincing.

APPERANCES REQUIRED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Granados Represented By Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Norma Granados-Maycott Represented By Todd L Turoci

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Jose Granados and Norma Granados-Maycott

Chapter 13

Jose Granados Represented By Todd L Turoci Todd L Turoci

Norma Granados-Maycott Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-18344

Adrien Liets and Marine Lazaro Liets

Chapter 7 #3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Volkswagon Golf

MOVANT: THE GOLDEN 1 CREDIT UNION

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Adrien Liets Represented By

Melissa A Raskey

Joint Debtor(s):

Marine Lazaro Liets Represented By Melissa A Raskey

Movant(s):

The Golden 1 Credit Union Represented By Mirco J Haag

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Adrien Liets and Marine Lazaro Liets

Chapter 7

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-18103

Jaime Harris St James

Chapter 7 #4.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2011 NISSAN ALTIMA, VIN: 1N4AL2EP3BC115969

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK A CA BANKING CORPORATION

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jaime Harris St James Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

MECHANICS BANK Represented By Vincent V Frounjian

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-17022

William Piere and Caitlyn Whalen

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 HONDA CR-V, VIN: 2HKR M3H4 0GH5 59081

MOVANT: HONDA LEAST TRUST

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

William Piere Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Caitlyn Whalen Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

HONDA LEASE TRUST Represented By

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

William Piere and Caitlyn Whalen

Vincent V Frounjian

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16983

Lakendra Johnson

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Kia Soul, VIN: KNDJP3A5XG7359630

MOVANT: AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES INC

Docket 22

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lakendra Johnson Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. Represented By

Jennifer H Wang

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14770

Lamar Ramon Benjamin

Chapter 13 #7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17455 Kentucky Derby Drive, Moreno Valley, California 92555

MOVANT: WVMF FUNDING LLC

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Lamar Ramon Benjamin Represented By

Ethan Kiwhan Chin

Movant(s):

WVMF Funding, LLC Represented By

Erin M McCartney

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14714

Gilbert L Belfatto and Carole L Morgan

Chapter 7 #8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 HONDA HR-V, VIN: 3CZR U5H5 0GM7 40402

MOVANT: HONDA LEASE TRUST

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

As noted by Movant, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(2)(C), the automatic stay terminated as to acts against Debtors when Debtors received their discharge on September 17, 2018. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §365(p)(1), the automatic stay in favor of the bankruptcy estate terminated as to this lease on August 1, 2018, the deadline for Trustee to assume or reject the unexpired lease. Therefore, the Court will GRANT the motion to the extent of confirming there is no stay in place.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Gilbert L Belfatto Represented By Christopher Hewitt

Joint Debtor(s):

Carole L Morgan Represented By Christopher Hewitt

10:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Gilbert L Belfatto and Carole L Morgan

Chapter 7

HONDA LEASE TRUST Represented By Vincent V Frounjian

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-14278

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Scion XB

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

From: 10/2/18 EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:

10/02/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: YES

Parties to indicate whether there has been progress on an agreement for an APO. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

David Bruce Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Joint Debtor(s):

Tina Marie Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee

Movant(s):

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By

Austin P Nagel

10:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-12782

Justa Nelida Guzman

Chapter 13 #10.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3527 N. Bronson St. San Bernardino, California 92407

MOVANT: THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

From: 9/4/18, 10/2/18 EH

Docket 27

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/22/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Justa Nelida Guzman Represented By Lionel E Giron

Movant(s):

The Bank of New York Mellon, et al Represented By

S Renee Sawyer Blume

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-19291

Carolyn Maxine Bodden

Chapter 13 #11.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: for property located at 370 Claremont St Hemet, CA 92545

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 10/16/18 EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Carolyn Maxine Bodden Represented By Edward G Topolski

Movant(s):

U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Sean C Ferry

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:17-15475

Shane Morgan

Chapter 7 #12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Volvo S60

MOVANT: VCFS AUTO LEASING CO

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)

and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Shane Morgan Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
VCFS Auto Leasing Co. Represented By Scott S Weltman
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-14228

Michelle Meredith

Chapter 7

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 102 Tesori Drive, Palm Desert, California 92211

MOVANT: OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC

EH

Docket 128

Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Movant’s sole legal basis for its request for relief from the automatic stay is that Movant is not protected by an adequate equity cushion. As noted by Trustee in its opposition, however, the equity cushion in this case is above the range required by Mellor and related case law. Therefore, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the motion for Trustee to market and sell the property.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michelle Meredith Pro Se
Movant(s):
Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Michelle Meredith

Noreen A Madoyan

Chapter 7
10:00 AM
6:16-18820

Chase D Chung

Chapter 13

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 60231 La Mirada Trail, Joshua Tree, California 92252

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

EH

Docket 73

Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chase D Chung Represented By Daniel C Sever
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Represented By Shreena Augustin Seth Greenhill April Harriott Theron S Covey Sean C Ferry
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Chase D Chung

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-16622

Xavier Roque Gutierrez and Sara Nicole Moran-Gutierrez

Chapter 13

#15.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1365 Crafton Avenue, #2057, Mentone, CA 92359

MOVANT: FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 77
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/5/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Xavier Roque Gutierrez Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Joint Debtor(s):
  Sara Nicole Moran-Gutierrez Represented By Paul Y Lee
  Movant(s):
  Federal National Mortgage Represented By Nichole Glowin
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:13-25137
  
  Herbert Anderson, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2058 Orchard Drive, Perris, CA 92571
  
  MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 62
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/6/2018
  
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  Based on the fact that Debtor appears to have completed his Chapter 13 plan, and based on the evidence submitted by Movant which appears to indicate that Debtor has made the last eighteen monthly payments, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent of lifting the automatic stay as it applies to the bankruptcy estate only.
  GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Herbert Anderson Jr. Represented By Todd B Becker
  Movant(s):
  Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. Represented By Michael Daniels Darlene C Vigil
  10:00 AM
  CONT...
  Trustee(s):
  
  Herbert Anderson, Jr.
  
  Chapter 13
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  2:00 PM
  6:18-18339
  
  Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #17.00 Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And
Requiring Status Report EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#18.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 9/11/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18
Also #19 EH
Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#19.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 5/8/18, 8/21/18, 9/11/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18

Also #18 EH
Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
3:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#20.00 Motion to Deem Oscar Brambila and Bruce Gordon Not Insiders for Purposes of Compensation

EH

Docket 173
Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018
BACKGROUND

On August 15, 2018, Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. Two days later, Debtor filed notices of setting insider compensation (the "Notices") for Bruce Gordon ("Gordon") and Oscar Brambila ("Brambila"). On August 30, 2018, the H.N. and Frances C. Berger Foundation ("Berger Foundation") filed its opposition to the Notices. On September 20, 2018, Debtor filed amended notices of setting insider compensation (the "Amended Notices") for Gordon and Brambila. On September 27, 2018, the Berger Foundation filed its opposition to the Amended Notices. On October 22, 2018, Debtor set the Amended notices for hearing on November 13, 2018.

On October 26, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to deem Gordon and Brambila not insiders for purposes of compensation. Debtor also filed an application shortening time, and the Court set a hearing for November 6, 2018, at 3:00 p.m, with opposition due at the hearing. Debtor argues that Gordon and Brambila are officers "in title only" and do not have any "corporate-level control" over Debtor.

DISCUSSION
3:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) defines "insider," in the corporate context, as including the following:
1. director of the debtor;
2. officer of the debtor;
3. person in control of the debtor;
4. partnership in which the debtor is a general partner;
5. general partner of the debtor; or
6. relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor;
Potentially at issue here are the first three subsections of the insider definition. At present, and given that only Debtor has filed a pleading with regard to this matter, the Court does not have any evidence before it which would suggest that Gordon and Brambila have sufficient control to be classified as either: (1) a statutory insider pursuant to § 101(31)(B)(iii); or (2) a non-statutory insider pursuant to case law. See, e.g., In re Beaver Valley Builder’s Supply, Inc., 177 B.R. 507 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1995) (Insider includes any person "who has a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor that his conduct is made subject to closer scrutiny"). Therefore, the Court will limit its analysis to whether Gordon and Brambila are insiders pursuant to § 101(31)(B)(i)-(ii).

Debtors relies on the case of In re Foothills Texas, Inc., 408 B.R. 573 (Bankr. D. Del. 2009) in support of its contention that an individual’s job title is not dispositive in determine whether that individual is an insider. In re Foothills Texas stated the following:
3:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties
The "officers at issue in this case are vice presidents. A vice president is "a person representing or deputizing for a president; an official who ranks immediately below a president." An official is obviously an officer. Thus, under the plain meaning of the words, a vice president is presumptively an

Chapter 11
officer, who, in turn, is an insider. Nonetheless, the mere title of a person does not end the inquiry.

Just as there may be non-statutory insiders that fall within the definition of an insider but are outside of the enumerated categories, there may be persons that fall within the enumerated categories but do not meet the definition of the category. Under the plain meaning of the words, the question is whether a person is taking part in the management of the debtor. In order to overcome the presumption that a person holding an officer’s title is not what he or she appears to be requires submission of evidence sufficient to establish that the officer is, in fact, not participating in the management of the debtor.

Id. at 579; see also In re NMI Sys., Inc., 179 B.R. 357, 369 (Bankr. D.D.C. 1995) (employing holistic approach to determine whether an individual was an officer).

Nevertheless, the reasoning of In re Foothills Texas is, to some extent, confusing. The statement that "there may be persons that fall within the enumerated categories but do not meet the definition of the category" appears paradoxical, for if an individual does not meet the definition of the category, then they would not fall within the enumerated categories. The Court is cognizant that there may be individuals whose job titled includes the term "officer" or "director" but who is not, under the relevant definition of the word, an "officer" or director." See, e.g., In re Kunz, 489 F.3d 1072 (10th Cir.
2007) (retired director emeritus not a director). Yet, subjecting all officers/directors to a control test would seem to render § 101(31)(B)(i)-(ii) superfluous, for the statue already contains a subsection classifying "person[s] in control" as insiders. See, e.g., In re Public Access Technology.Com, Inc., 307 B.R. 500, 505 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2004) ("It is unnecessary for a court to determine whether an individual is both a director and a person in control, or both an officer and a person in control, as the statutory definition is clearly stated in the disjunctive."); see also In re Bonds Distrib. Co., Inc., 2000 WL 33673768 at *3 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. 2000) (declining to consider whether someone "acts" like a director").
3:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

On the record before the Court, the Court disagrees with Debtor’s interpretation. First, the plain language of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) states that officers and directors are insiders, and Debtor has conceded that both Gordon and Barambila were told they were officers. Second, to read § 101(31)(B) as requiring, or permitting, this Court to consider whether an officer is "really" an officer, through the use of some sort of control, renders § 101(31)(B)(i)-(ii) superfluous. In re Foothills Texas appears to stand for the proposition that the list of insiders can be both expanded, or contracted, based on a holistic analysis. While § 101(31)(B) certainly can be expanded, because it contains a non-exhaustive list of examples, foundational principles of statutory interpretation preclude the list’s contraction. See, e.g., In re Ribcke, 64 B.R. 663 (Bankr. D. Md. 1986) ("The Marksons are subject to the label of insiders in this case by virtue of the statutory definition which may be expanded by a factual presentation but never contracted."). Finally, policy reasons weigh against the imposition of an additional requirement that an officer or director actually "act" like an officer or director, because the regulation of such individuals is designed to protect the creditors, who would not have the level of access necessary to mount a factual defense to an assertion that an individual was an officer in title only.

Separately, assuming, arguendo, that the Court found In re Foothills Texas to be persuasive, the evidence presented does not clearly establish that Gordon and Brambila do not take part in the management of Debtor. To the contrary, both appear to have day to day management authority.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
3:00 PM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall Ryan W Beall
11:00 AM
6:11-38759

Steve Allen Alldis

Chapter 7

#1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 31
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
11/7/2018
No opposition has been filed.
Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Accountant for Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:
11:00 AM
CONT...

Steve Allen Alldis

Chapter 7
Trustee Fees: $ 7,949.75 Trustee Expenses: $ 38.70

Accountant Fees: $ 2,371.50 Accountant Costs: $ 26.55

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Steve Allen Alldis Represented By Hector C Perez
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:16-20927

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7

#2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation Also #3
EH

Docket 70
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
11/7/2018
No opposition has been filed.
Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee, Counsel for Trustee, and Accountant for Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated
11:00 AM
CONT...

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7
professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 26,570.42 Trustee Expenses: $ 540.45

Attorney Fees:
$ 43,812
Attorney Costs:
$ 2,040.98
Accountant Fees:
$ 18,386.00
Accountant Costs:
$ 191.15
Court Costs:
$ 350.00

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mee Soon Kim Represented By Minh Duy Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By David Seror Michael W Davis
Jessica L Bagdanov
11:00 AM
6:16-20927

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7

#3.00 CONT Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation From: 10/24/18
Also #2 EH
Docket 64
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mee Soon Kim Represented By Minh Duy Nguyen
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Mee Soon Kim

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By David Seror Michael W Davis
Jessica L Bagdanov
11:00 AM
6:17-11834

David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood

Chapter 7

#4.00 CONT Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation From: 10/24/18
EH

Docket 56
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
11/7/2018
No opposition has been filed.
Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Counsel for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined
11:00 AM
CONT...

David Leroy Norwood and Carol Ann Norwood

Chapter 7
to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee’s Fees: $ 4,950.00 Trustee’s Expenses: $ 528.92

Attorney Fees: $ 20,482.50
Attorney Costs: $ 677.91

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David Leroy Norwood Represented By Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Carol Ann Norwood Represented By Jenny L Doling
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Brandon J Iskander Leonard M Shulman Lynda T Bui
11:00 AM
6:18-16649

Michael W Artmore

Chapter 7

#5.00 Motion for an Order Expunging the Filing of this Bankruptcy Case, or in the Alternative, to Annul or Redact the Filing of this Case from Debtor's Public Record and Directing the Credit Reporting Agencies to Delete the Filing of this Bankruptcy from his Reports

EH

Docket 19
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:

11/7/18

BACKGROUND
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael W Artmore

Chapter 7

On August 7, 2018, a Chapter 7 voluntary petition was filed on behalf of Michael Artmore ("Debtor").

On October 4, 2018, Debtor filed a stipulation with UST requesting dismissal of the case and the return of certain bank funds to Debtor. The stipulation recites that Debtor did not file, or cause to be filed, the instant case. The stipulation states that the social security number used for this case only matches Debtor’s last four digits, and does not reflect his actual social security number. Finally, the stipulation states that Debtor was not aware of the instant filing until he was informed that the bank has frozen his bank account. On October 12, 2018, the instant case was dismissed.

On October 5, 2018, Debtor filed a motion for an order expunging this case, or, alternatively, redacting the filing from the public record and directing the credit reporting agencies to remove the filing.

DISCUSSION

Debtor has provided a case in support of the argument that a bankruptcy filing may be expunged if the filing was done with the knowledge of the debtor. See In re Duque, 2016 WL 4239608 at *1 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2016). Nevertheless, the availability of this remedy, and the analysis the Court is required to consider, is not clear. See Peter C. Alexander, Identity Theft and Bankruptcy Expungement, 77 AM. BANKR. L.J. 409,
412-13 (2003) ("The order for an expungement of a bankruptcy case filing does present significant analytical difficulties. Despite the rise in identity theft and consequent fraudulent bankruptcy petitions, there are no reported decisions wherein expungement has been ordered and thus there is little guidance on the subject.
Moreover, in the few cases that discuss expungement of a debtor’s records, there appears to be little agreement about the specific source of a bankruptcy court’s authority to expunge."); Maureen A. Tighe & Emily Rosenblum, "What Do You Mean, I Filed Bankruptcy?" - Or How the Law Allows a Perfect Stranger to Purchase an Automatic Stay in Your Name, 32 LOY. L.A. L. REV. 1009, 1024 (1999) ("A second
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael W Artmore

Chapter 7
problem not adequately addressed under the current Bankruptcy Code is that there is no clear provision allowing for expungement of a fraudulent filed bankruptcy. This leaves bankruptcy judges unsure of how they can or should handle these victims even where a victim has spent the time and expense to prove he or she was not the one who filed the bankruptcy.").

Since the publication of the two articles cited above, several courts have considered the issue whether expungement is an appropriate remedy when a bankruptcy is fraudulently filed unbeknownst to a debtor. Several of these cases, however, deal with a debtor who, to some extent, participated in the preparation of the filing, but had misgivings either afterwards or shortly before the filing. In a published decision in In re Storay, the bankruptcy court concluded that it had the authority to expunge an unauthorized bankruptcy filing pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a). 364 B.R. 194, 196 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2006) ("Based upon the weight of the evidence, the Court finds that cause exists to expunge this case pursuant to § 105.").

Not only is the availability of expungement in this situation unsettled, the adequacy of the remedy is unclear. One bankruptcy court noted the following:

Moreover, expunging the Case at this point may make it more difficult for the Purported Debtor to convince the credit reporting agencies and prospective creditors that the filing was unauthorized, as the Case would be akin to an apparition – a creditor or credit reporting agency may have a notation that it had been filed, but would not have any way to access a case number or perform an electronic search to locate an explanation for its filing or located an order declaring the filing to be unauthorized.

This anomaly can be prevented by fashioning alternative relief. Accordingly, the Court finds that the filing of the Case was unauthorized by Anita Elizabeth Dick and was filed fraudulently by Gary Oseroff. The Court directs the Clerk to create a "flag" which states "Unauthorized Bankruptcy Filing – Identity Theft Victim" and to associate that flag with the Case and make it publicly and prominently viewable whenever the Case Information is electronically accessed. The Court also directs that the Clerk make the following docket
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael W Artmore
entry for this Memorandum Opinion and Order: "Memorandum Opinion and Order re-opening the Case, finding that Anita Elizabeth Dick is an identity theft victim and did not authorize the filing of the Case, and grating other relief." The Debtor is authorized to forward copies of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to whomever she sees fit.

Chapter 7

In re Dick, 2006 WL 6544157 at *5 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2006) (footnote omitted).

While it appears that the majority opinion is that a bankruptcy case may be expunged pursuant to § 105(a), it is unclear whether that is the appropriate remedy in this case. Regarding Debtor’s request that the credit agencies be directed to alter Debtor’s credit reports to remove this filing, it does not appear that the Court has jurisdiction to order such a request, and, to the extent such jurisdiction does exist, the request would appear to require an adversary pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7001(7).

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael W Artmore Represented By Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Michael W Artmore Represented By Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michael W Artmore

Robert P Goe

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01102 PRINGLE v. Capital One Bank (USA), National Association

#6.00 Motion to Continue Status Conference Also #7
EH

Docket 23
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 10/25/18
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
2:00 PM
CONT...

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Defendant(s):
Capital One Bank (USA), National Represented By
Kevin M Eckhardt
Movant(s):
JOHN PRINGLE Represented By Robert P Goe
Plaintiff(s):
JOHN PRINGLE Represented By Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01102 PRINGLE v. Capital One Bank (USA), National Association

#7.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01102. Complaint by JOHN PRINGLE against Capital One Bank (USA), National Association. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Complaint for: (1) Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3439.04(a)(2), 3439.05; (2)
Avoidance of Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B); (3) Recovery of Avoided Transfers Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550; and (4) Disallowance of Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502 Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

From: 9/5/18 Also #6
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/9/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Matter Notes:
Appearances:

Order by Attorney                   Order by Chambers

Status Conference cont'd. to:

Pretrial Conf set for:                                            Trial set for:

Joint Status Report due:                      Scheduling order due

Discovery cutoff:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7
Last day to file pretrial motions and pretrial order:

Complete 1 day of mediation by:           Order appointing Mediator

Evidentiary Hearing Set:
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
Defendant(s):
Capital One Bank (USA), National Represented By
Kevin M Eckhardt
Plaintiff(s):
JOHN PRINGLE Represented By Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:17-13853

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01197 Itria Ventures, LLC v. Asif et al

#8.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:17-ap-01197. Complaint by Itria Ventures, LLC against Malik Muhammad Asif, Zobia Asif. Fee Amount $350 Complaint Objecting To Dischargeability of Debt Nature of Suit: (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud))

From: 11/15/17, 12/6/17, 1/10/18, 6/6/18, 10/3/18

EH

Docket 1
Matter Notes:
Appearances:

Order by Attorney                   Order by Chambers

Status Conference cont'd. to:

Pretrial Conf set for:                                            Trial set for:

Joint Status Report due:                      Scheduling order due

Discovery cutoff:

Last day to file pretrial motions and pretrial order:

Complete 1 day of mediation by:           Order appointing Mediator

Evidentiary Hearing Set:
Tentative Ruling:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Malik Muhammad Asif

Chapter 7
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Malik Muhammad Asif Represented By David T Egli
Zobia Asif Represented By
David T Egli
Joint Debtor(s):
Zobia Asif Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Itria Ventures, LLC Represented By Michael F Chekian
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Thomas H Casey
2:00 PM
6:17-14345

Ruth Herrera Dresser

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01186 Gordon v. Dresser

#9.00 CONT Pre-Trial Conference on Complaint fld 8-25-17 for Non Dischargeability of Debt under False Pretense, False Representations and Fraud 11 U.S.C. Sec.
523(A)(2); Non Dischargeability of Debt under Fraud and Defalcation While Acting in a Fiduciary Capacity 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(A)(4); Non Dischargeability of Debt for Wilfull and Malicious Injury 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(A)(6)

From: 3/29/18 EH
Docket 1
Matter Notes:
Appearances:

Order by Attorney                   Order by Chambers

Status Conference cont'd. to:

Pretrial Conf set for:                                            Trial set for:

Joint Status Report due:                      Scheduling order due

Discovery cutoff:

Last day to file pretrial motions and pretrial order:

Complete 1 day of mediation by:           Order appointing Mediator

Evidentiary Hearing Set:
Tentative Ruling:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Ruth Herrera Dresser

Chapter 7
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ruth Herrera Dresser Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Defendant(s):
Ruth Dresser Represented By
Michael Jay Berger
Plaintiff(s):
Marshall Gordon Represented By Marvin H Weiss
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-12027

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01156 Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Williams et al

#10.00 Motion for Default Judgment Against Defendants Amy Williams and Richard M. Thomas, Jr

Also #11 EH
Docket 13
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Matter Notes:
APPEARANCES:

ORDER BY ATTORNEY         ORDER BY CHAMBERS

GRANTED:             DENIED:

CONT'D. TO:

WITHDRAWN:

OBJ SUSTAINED:                      OBJ OVERRULED:

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET:
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard M. Thomas Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Defendant(s):
Amy Williams Pro Se
Richard M Thomas Jr. Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Raquel Young Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Movant(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
Plaintiff(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
6:18-12027

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01156 Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Williams et al

#11.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01156. Complaint by Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee against Amy Williams, Richard M Thomas Jr.. (Charge To Estate) ($350.00). Complaint to: (1) Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer; (2) Obtain Declaratory Relief as to Ownership of Real Property; and (3) Authorize Sale of Property Owned in Part by Non-Debtor Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

From: 9/26/18 Also #10
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Matter Notes:
Appearances:

Order by Attorney                   Order by Chambers

Status Conference cont'd. to:

Pretrial Conf set for:                                            Trial set for:

Joint Status Report due:                      Scheduling order due

Discovery cutoff:

Last day to file pretrial motions and pretrial order:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Complete 1 day of mediation by:           Order appointing Mediator

Evidentiary Hearing Set:
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard M. Thomas Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Defendant(s):
Amy Williams Pro Se
Richard M Thomas Jr. Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Raquel Young Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Plaintiff(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Frank X Ruggier
11:00 AM
6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13

#1.00 CONT Motion of U.S. Trustee for the Entry of an Order Requiring Nationstar Mortgage LLC to Provide an Escrow Account Reconciliation Statement & Related Relief

From: 6/28/18, 8/30/18 EH
Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Joint Debtor(s):
Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:13-28940

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

#2.00 CONT Motion for Leave to File New Order on Debtors' Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Debtor's Principal Residence.

From: 9/13/18 EH
Docket 124
Tentative Ruling:

11/8/2018
The Court finds Debtors' request for authority to lodge an amended order appropriate under FRCP 60(a). Specifically, the Court is persuaded that the Court likely intended to approve the Motion and grant lien avoidance on completion of plan payments rather than on receipt of a discharge but due to clerical mistake by Debtor in the lodgment of the order, entered an order granting avoidance on discharge in a case where the Debtors were not eligible for discharge and where that ineligibility was apparent to all parties. For these reasons, and finding notice was proper under the circumstances, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion permitting the lodgment of an amended order.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant may lodge an order within 7 days.

9/13/18

BACKGROUND

On November 21, 2013, Jose & Hiliana Castellanos ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Debtors previously received a discharge in a Chapter 7 proceeding on October 21, 2010. As such, Debtors were ineligible for a discharge in the instant
11:00 AM
CONT...
case.

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13

On December 17, 2013, Debtors converted their case to Chapter 13. On December 24, 2013, Debtors filed a motion to avoid liens pursuant to § 506(d). The motion requested that the second and third liens on Debtors’ principal residence, held by Bank of America and Excel National Bank, respectively be avoided conditioned upon "receipt of a chapter 13 discharge." On March 10, 2014, the Court granted the relief sought in the motion.

On June 6, 2018, the Chapter 13 trustee filed his final report. On July 3, 2018, Debtors filed a motion for leave to file new order on Debtors’ motion to avoid junior lien. On July 25, 2018, Debtors re-filed the motion, and the matter was set for hearing.

DISCUSSION

Debtors appear to argue that 11 U.S.C. § 105 provides the basis for the relief requested FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b), incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED.
R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024, however, provides the mechanism whereby a party can seek relief from a final order. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(c)(1), however, Debtors are time-barred from bringing an argument under FED. R. CIV. P Rule 60(b)(1)-(3). Therefore, the only applicable bases for relief are FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(4)-(6).

The motion filed by Debtors does not provide adequate information to allow the Court to apply the applicable legal framework, even if the Court were to construe the motion as requesting relief pursuant to an appropriate legal provision.

Furthermore, in light of this Court’s ruling in In re Washington, 587 B.R. 349 (Bankr.
C.D. Cal. 2018), permitting Debtors to amend their motion at the end of their case would be prejudicial to creditors and would open up a legal loophole. Pursuant to In re Washington, the Debtors may be required to pay the claims of the contingently
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13
avoided lienholders through the Chapter 13 plan pro rata with other unsecured creditors. Allowing Debtors to fix their own mistake, at the conclusion of the case, would allow Debtors to avoid the secured claims of the junior lienholders while avoiding paying those claims through the Chapter 13 plan, a result expressly rejected by In re Washington.

In conclusion, Debtors have failed to identify the appropriate legal provision for the relief requested, have failed to make an adequate legal showing to justify relief under a legally appropriate provision, and have requested relief which, if granted, would contravene this Court’s decision in In re Washington. For all the above reasons, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Joint Debtor(s):
Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Movant(s):
Jose Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner Mark E Brenner
11:00 AM
CONT...

Jose Castellanos and Hiliana Castellanos

Chapter 13
Hiliana Castellanos Represented By Mark E Brenner
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:14-19913

Martin Caballero and Clementina Caballero

Chapter 13

#3.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments (re: increased income)

From: 10/25/18 EH
Docket 127

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Martin Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres
Joint Debtor(s):
Clementina Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres
Movant(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-11261

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13

#4.00 CONT Order to show cause why Alon Darvish should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 105 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020

CASE DISMISSED 3/13/17

From: 11/30/17, 1/25/18, 4/12/18, 6/14/18, 8/23/18, 10/18/18

EH

Docket 30
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
11/30/17
BACKGROUND
On February 21, 2017, Ernie Macias ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 13 relief. The Debtor’s case was filed by Alon Darvish ("Darvish"). On March 13, 2017, the Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file information.

On March 24, 2017, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed a Motion to Disgorge Attorney’s Fees ("Disgorgement Motion"). On June 13, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the UST’s Disgorgement Motion (the "Disgorgement Order"). The Disgorgement Order required Darvish to file his disclosure of compensation, and to disgorge fees received from the Debtor back to him.

On September 20, 2017, the UST filed its Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why Alon Darvish Should Not Be Held In Contempt Of Court Pursuant To 11
U.S.C. § 105 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 9020 (the "Motion for OSC"). The Motion for OSC specifically asserted that Darvish had failed to comply with any part of the Disgorgement Order. The UST’s Motion for OSC further asserted that Darvish had repeatedly failed to disclose compensation and had been sanctioned for such conduct under similar circumstances in at least 6 other cases. (Motion for OSC at 9).
11:00 AM
CONT...

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13

On October 20, 2017, the Court granted the Motion for OSC and ordered Darvish to show cause why he should not be held in contempt (the "OSC"). Darvish filed his response to the OSC on November 16, 2017 ("Response"). On November 21, 2017, the UST replied to the Response.

DISCUSSION
In his Response, Darvish indicated that his practice includes the filing of skeletal petitions for chapter 13 debtors for the purpose of stopping foreclosures. He indicated that when such skeletal petitions are filed, his software does not file the Disclosure of Compensation. Darvish asserts that he is a solo practitioner who is overwhelmed and understaffed and who is trying to rectify the issues in his practice. In Reply, the UST objects particularly to Darvish’s failure to outline specific steps he intends to take to remedy the issues at his firm. The UST is also concerned that Darvish has essentially admitted that his practice includes the filing of abusive petitions intended solely to avoid foreclosures. The UST requests that the Court continue the matter for Darvish to set forth specific remedial actions as ordered. The UST also requests that the Court separately consider whether a separate order to show cause is justified based on Darvish’s inherently abusive prevention practice.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court agrees with the UST that Darvish’s explanation is insufficient. Darvish’s Response indicates clearly the reason for the failure to file disclosure of compensation forms. Despite this fact, he does not explain the ongoing failure to file these forms, particularly where he has previously been sanctioned for failing to disclose his compensation. The ongoing failure to file required documents, despite having already been sanctioned, supports the UST’s request for a specific plan of remediation. Absent such plan, Darvish may simply continue to rely on his thus far unreliable bankruptcy filing software.

Separately, the UST’s concern regarding Darvish’s practice of filing skeletal petitions is well-taken. In particular, if Darvish is advising his clients to file abusive petitions to
11:00 AM
CONT...

Ernie Macias

Chapter 13
delay foreclosure, such conduct may warrant further sanctions/discipline.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ernie Macias Represented By
Alon Darvish
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-14972

Jude Okwor

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 10/18/18 EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jude Okwor Represented By
Javier H Castillo
Movant(s):
Jude Okwor Represented By
Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16366

Jose Luis Tafoya

Chapter 13

#6.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Luis Tafoya Represented By Clay E Presley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16458

Leonard Walter Frost, Jr. and Joan Cheng Frost

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Leonard Walter Frost Jr. Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Joint Debtor(s):
Joan Cheng Frost Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16489

Rebecca Moore

Chapter 13

#8.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rebecca Moore Represented By Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16505

Harold Edward Correa and David Corey White

Chapter 13

#9.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Harold Edward Correa Represented By Matthew D. Resnik
Joint Debtor(s):
David Corey White Represented By Matthew D. Resnik
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16694

Cynthia M Gonzalez and Guadalupe Siddiqui

Chapter 13

#10.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Cynthia M Gonzalez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Guadalupe Siddiqui Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13

#11.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 1 by Claimant Tyler & Bursch, LLP. EH
Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16868

John Morris and Cassandra Morris

Chapter 13

#12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/25/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John Morris Represented By
Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Cassandra Morris Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17173

Frank Prouty

Chapter 13

#13.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Frank Prouty Represented By
Nima S Vokshori
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17204

Justo Ocegueda

Chapter 13

#14.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/25/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Justo Ocegueda Represented By Lionel E Giron
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17229

Joe Anthony Dominguez, Sr.

Chapter 13

#15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/31/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joe Anthony Dominguez Sr. Represented By
Timothy L McCandless
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17237

Michael Hernando Ferriola

Chapter 13

#16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/14/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael Hernando Ferriola Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17307

Rita Denise Pappalardo and Steven Joseph Pappalardo

Chapter 13

#17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rita Denise Pappalardo Represented By Aaron Lloyd
Joint Debtor(s):
Steven Joseph Pappalardo Represented By Aaron Lloyd
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17328

Dustin Taylor Sharp and Stephanie Regina Sharp

Chapter 13

#18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Dustin Taylor Sharp Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Stephanie Regina Sharp Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17344

John Ryan

Chapter 13

#19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/18/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
John Ryan Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17349

Thomas More Butler and Tamara Butler

Chapter 13

#20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Thomas More Butler Represented By
Stuart G Steingraber
Joint Debtor(s):
Tamara Butler Represented By
Stuart G Steingraber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17351

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

#21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17381

Charles Mickey Alligood

Chapter 13

#22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Charles Mickey Alligood Represented By Alon Darvish
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17443

Martha Diaz

Chapter 13

#23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Martha Diaz Represented By
Michael E Clark
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17485

Silvia R Segura

Chapter 13

#24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/21/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Silvia R Segura Represented By Ricardo A Figueroa
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17499

Engracia Alcala

Chapter 13

#25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Engracia Alcala Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17502

Shaun Besci

Chapter 13

#26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Shaun Besci Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17504

Jossue Aly Majana

Chapter 13

#27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jossue Aly Majana Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17540

Norma Hermosillo Hernandez

Chapter 13

#28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Norma Hermosillo Hernandez Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17556

Daniel Javier Garcia

Chapter 13

#29.00 Motion to Authorize Loan Modification (LMM) with Flagstar Bank or for an Order Permitting Parties to enter into such an agreement

Also #30 EH
Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Daniel Javier Garcia Represented By Steven A Alpert
Movant(s):
Daniel Javier Garcia Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17556

Daniel Javier Garcia

Chapter 13

#30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Also #29 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Daniel Javier Garcia Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17597

David Meisland

Chapter 13

#31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
David Meisland Represented By Nima S Vokshori
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17605

Joseph N Duguay, II

Chapter 13

#32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph N Duguay II Represented By Andy C Warshaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18622

Jackie May Zapata

Chapter 13

#33.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate re 2003 Volvo Sedan S40 and 29706 Stonewood Rd Temecula, CA 92591

MOVANT: JACKIE MAY ZAPATA

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jackie May Zapata Pro Se
Movant(s):
Jackie May Zapata Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-18206

Darrin Hammond and Sandra Hammond

Chapter 13

#34.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 81

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Darrin Hammond Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Sandra Hammond Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-18557

Michael Anthony Clay and Brenda Ann Clay

Chapter 13

#35.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/13/18
EH

Docket 275

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Anthony Clay Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Brenda Ann Clay Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-25297

Cheryl Ann Hill

Chapter 13

#36.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 170
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/25/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cheryl Ann Hill Represented By Matthew D. Resnik
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-28068

Clarence White

Chapter 13

#37.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 153
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/16/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Clarence White Represented By Steven A Wolvek
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-30567

Robert Warren Gillam and Diana Lynn Gillam

Chapter 13

#38.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 84
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/7/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Robert Warren Gillam Represented By James P Doan
Joint Debtor(s):
Diana Lynn Gillam Represented By James P Doan
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-10539

Joseph Lane Hilliard and Christine Vivian Hilliard

Chapter 13

#39.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 63

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph Lane Hilliard Represented By Ronald W Ask
Joint Debtor(s):
Christine Vivian Hilliard Represented By Ronald W Ask
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-17561

Percival Inciong

Chapter 13

#40.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Percival Inciong Represented By Brian C Miles
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-19029

Sheila Marie Dejesa

Chapter 13

#41.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 78

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sheila Marie Dejesa Represented By Lisa H Robinson John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-20007

Celia Baeza

Chapter 13

#42.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Celia Baeza Represented By
Todd B Becker
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-20757

Robert A Ausler and Marie A Galloway

Chapter 13

#43.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 128

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Robert A Ausler Represented By James T Lillard
Joint Debtor(s):
Marie A Galloway Represented By James T Lillard
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-21377

Adam Max Thewes and Kristine Ann Thewes

Chapter 13

#44.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Adam Max Thewes Represented By Steven A Alpert
Joint Debtor(s):
Kristine Ann Thewes Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-22637

Michelle Ann Maki

Chapter 13

#45.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-24084

Michael Lee Barnes and Belinda Ann Barnes

Chapter 13

#46.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 110

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Lee Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Belinda Ann Barnes Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-24888

Jesus Padilla Simental

Chapter 13

#47.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 65

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jesus Padilla Simental Represented By Bryn C Deb
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-10660

Patricia Eagan

Chapter 13

#48.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 65

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Patricia Eagan Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-13346

Chris Maddox and Christie Michelle Maddox

Chapter 13

#49.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 71

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Chris Maddox Represented By Sanaz S Bereliani
Joint Debtor(s):
Christie Michelle Maddox Represented By Sanaz S Bereliani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-15137

David E. Laliberte and Lori L. Laliberte

Chapter 13

#50.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
David E. Laliberte Represented By Bernard J Gartland Timothy S Huyck
Joint Debtor(s):
Lori L. Laliberte Represented By Bernard J Gartland Timothy S Huyck
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-15522

Scott Allan Oswald and Lisa Frances Oswald

Chapter 13

#51.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 95

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Scott Allan Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Frances Oswald Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-15971

Allen J Sheerin

Chapter 13

#52.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 77
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/23/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Allen J Sheerin Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-16367

John Stephen Puddy, Jr.

Chapter 13

#53.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 61

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John Stephen Puddy Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-19069

Zulu A Ali

Chapter 13

#54.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 123
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Zulu A Ali Represented By
Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-19432

Kirk Eugene Frantz and Mary Elizabeth Frantz

Chapter 13

#55.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 140
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Kirk Eugene Frantz Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Joint Debtor(s):
Mary Elizabeth Frantz Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-19542

Philipp Johannes Borner and Audrey Faustorilla Borner

Chapter 13

#56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Philipp Johannes Borner Represented By
D Justin Harelik
Joint Debtor(s):
Audrey Faustorilla Borner Represented By
D Justin Harelik
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-20006

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13

#57.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 72
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carl J Charlot Represented By
Michael A Younge
Joint Debtor(s):
Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-20387

Marion Schmidt

Chapter 13

#58.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Marion Schmidt Represented By Daniel C Sever
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-20998

Eric Kissell

Chapter 13

#59.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 76
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/23/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Eric Kissell Represented By
William J Howell
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-13169

Teresa M. Dearmond

Chapter 13

#60.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 72
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Teresa M. Dearmond Represented By Amanda G Billyard Andy C Warshaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-13422

Daniel Jimenez and Addy Marlene Jimenez

Chapter 13

#61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 33
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/25/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Daniel Jimenez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Joint Debtor(s):
Addy Marlene Jimenez Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-13872

Kimberly Ann Bowen

Chapter 13

#62.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18, 9/13/18, 10/18/18
EH

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Kimberly Ann Bowen Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-14440

Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino

Chapter 13

#63.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
Joint Debtor(s):
Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-15097

Arlene Wilson Jackson

Chapter 13

#64.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 46
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/7/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Arlene Wilson Jackson Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-15216

Charles Bowen Blanton and Heddy Maria Blanton

Chapter 13

#65.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 63
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Bowen Blanton Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Heddy Maria Blanton Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-16314

Anthony James Parker and Cynthia Parker

Chapter 13

#66.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 61
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/7/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Anthony James Parker Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Cynthia Parker Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-16319

Jeffrey Otto Schellin and Jennifer Lynn Schellin

Chapter 13

#67.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 70
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/31/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jeffrey Otto Schellin Represented By John F Brady
Joint Debtor(s):
Jennifer Lynn Schellin Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-17765

Mary Jones

Chapter 13

#68.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 51

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mary Jones Represented By
Matthew D. Resnik
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-17893

Ashley Douglas Faulstich

Chapter 13

#69.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 72

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ashley Douglas Faulstich Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-18082

Joseph John Vargas and Lydia Vargas

Chapter 13

#70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 85

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph John Vargas Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Lydia Vargas Represented By
Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-18359

Joseph Liebgott, IV and Robby Jean Harrison

Chapter 13

#71.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 92

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph Liebgott IV Represented By John F Brady
Joint Debtor(s):
Robby Jean Harrison Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-18990

John D Castro, Jr and Jennifer Manda Castro

Chapter 13

#72.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 55
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
John D Castro Jr Represented By Chris A Mullen
Joint Debtor(s):
Jennifer Manda Castro Represented By Chris A Mullen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-20081

Richard LaFayatte Sellers

Chapter 13

#73.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard LaFayatte Sellers Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-20133

Deborah Catherine Hamernik

Chapter 13

#74.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 9/13/18, 10/25/18
Also #75 EH
Docket 68

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-20133

Deborah Catherine Hamernik

Chapter 13

#75.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency Also #74
EH

Docket 76

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Deborah Catherine Hamernik Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10460

Julio Cesar Cacho and Rosalie Ann Cacho

Chapter 13

#76.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) From: 10/25/18
EH

Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Julio Cesar Cacho Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Joint Debtor(s):
Rosalie Ann Cacho Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10620

Larry R. Hoddick and Joyce Kelly Hoddick

Chapter 13

#77.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 43
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/10/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Larry R. Hoddick Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Joyce Kelly Hoddick Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10787

Willie J Brooks

Chapter 13

#78.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 39
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Willie J Brooks Represented By Kevin Tang
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-11245

Bryan D. Chriss

Chapter 13

#79.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 63
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 9/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Bryan D. Chriss Represented By Michael Smith Cynthia L Gibson Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-11658

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Chapter 13

#80.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency Also #81
EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-11658

Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie

Chapter 13

#81.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Tax Returns/Refunds From: 7/23/18
Also #80 EH
Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Maisha Lenette Ghant-Elie Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-11800

Veronica Salinas

Chapter 13

#82.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 39

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Veronica Salinas Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-12712

Jose Luis Castillo

Chapter 13

#83.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Luis Castillo Represented By Sunita N Sood
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-12719

Fernando Herrera, III

Chapter 13

#84.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 28
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 7/25/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Fernando Herrera III Represented By
James D. Hornbuckle
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-13032

Victor Warrenlee Anastasi, Jr. and Diane Lynne Anastasi

Chapter 13

#85.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Victor Warrenlee Anastasi Jr. Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Diane Lynne Anastasi Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-13890

Peter Hiroshi Kiyasu and Jennifer Ann Kiyasu

Chapter 13

#86.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Peter Hiroshi Kiyasu Represented By Steven A Alpert
Joint Debtor(s):
Jennifer Ann Kiyasu Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-14549

Denice Laree Grimes and Derrick Gregory Grimes

Chapter 13

#87.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Denice Laree Grimes Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Joint Debtor(s):
Derrick Gregory Grimes Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-14789

Sadia Sohail

Chapter 13

#88.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sadia Sohail Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15032

Ruben Lopez and Jessica Lopez

Chapter 13

#89.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ruben Lopez Represented By
Terrence Fantauzzi
Joint Debtor(s):
Jessica Lopez Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15102

Gwendolyn Washington

Chapter 13

#90.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 72

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gwendolyn Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15285

Trevor D. Washington and Sandra Washington

Chapter 13

#91.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Trevor D. Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Sandra Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15427

Cary Lee Surface and Amber Dawn Surface

Chapter 7

#92.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 86
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 10/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cary Lee Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
Joint Debtor(s):
Amber Dawn Surface Represented By Lionel E Giron
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13

#93.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 64

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Gehrig Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15772

Annette Leshon Rudd

Chapter 13

#94.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency EH
Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Annette Leshon Rudd Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16164

William Richard Newborg and Serina Rae Newborg

Chapter 13

#95.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
William Richard Newborg Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Joint Debtor(s):
Serina Rae Newborg Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16295

Coe Lamoureux and Julie Lamoureux

Chapter 13

#96.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 28

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Coe Lamoureux Represented By
W. Derek May
Joint Debtor(s):
Julie Lamoureux Represented By
W. Derek May
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16350

Elvira Stark

Chapter 13

#97.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 22
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED
8/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Elvira Stark Represented By
Robert L Firth
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16699

Cindy Louise Lawson

Chapter 13

#98.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Cindy Louise Lawson Represented By Gary S Saunders
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16751

Gary Ramirez and Christina Faith Ramirez

Chapter 13

#99.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 35

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gary Ramirez Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Joint Debtor(s):
Christina Faith Ramirez Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-16795

Artush Stepanian and Wendy L. Wilkie

Chapter 13

#100.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Artush Stepanian Represented By
James D. Hornbuckle
Joint Debtor(s):
Wendy L. Wilkie Represented By
James D. Hornbuckle
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-17531

Harvey Everett Mosely and Jean Ann Mosely

Chapter 13

#101.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 29
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Harvey Everett Mosely Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Jean Ann Mosely Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-17829

Derek Brian Winkenweder

Chapter 13

#102.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Derek Brian Winkenweder Represented By Alon Darvish
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-17942

Viorel Bucur

Chapter 13

#103.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 78

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Viorel Bucur Represented By
Michael Jay Berger
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-18340

Cary Allen Griggs and Heather Lynn Griggs

Chapter 13

#104.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 36

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Cary Allen Griggs Represented By Ronald W Ask
Joint Debtor(s):
Heather Lynn Griggs Represented By Ronald W Ask
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-18482

Roberto Garcia Garcia and Maria Martha Garcia

Chapter 13

#105.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18, 9/27/18, 10/18/18
EH

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Roberto Garcia Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Maria Martha Garcia Represented By Michael E Clark Barry E Borowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-19433

Edward Uy Hidalgo and Trixie Quijada

Chapter 13

#106.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 35
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Edward Uy Hidalgo Represented By Keith F Rouse
Joint Debtor(s):
Trixie Quijada Represented By Keith F Rouse
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-19892

Lena Dolores Wade

Chapter 13

#107.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 39
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lena Dolores Wade Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20055

Laquance Denise Mejia

Chapter 13

#108.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 42
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Laquance Denise Mejia Represented By Cynthia A Dunning
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20114

Frank Garcia and Susan Garcia

Chapter 13

#109.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Frank Garcia Represented By
Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Susan Garcia Represented By
Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20240

Natona Smith and Tameiko Smith

Chapter 13

#110.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Natona Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Joint Debtor(s):
Tameiko Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20473

Felipe Gerardo

Chapter 13

#111.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 29
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/7/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Felipe Gerardo Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-10127

David H Yopp

Chapter 7

#112.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 25
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 7/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David H Yopp Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-10633

Charles Mickey Alligood

Chapter 13

#113.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 31
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 8/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Mickey Alligood Represented By Alon Darvish
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-10825

William Thomas Pedrino and Terri Lyn Pedrino

Chapter 13

#114.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 51

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
William Thomas Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Terri Lyn Pedrino Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-10907

Gloria Ann Dodson

Chapter 13

#115.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gloria Ann Dodson Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-10940

Ruben L Benitez and Christina M Benitez

Chapter 13

#116.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 27
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/5/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ruben L Benitez Represented By Sundee M Teeple
Joint Debtor(s):
Christina M Benitez Represented By Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11416

Darlene J. Wadler

Chapter 13

#117.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Darlene J. Wadler Represented By Michael Jay Berger
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11701

Wayne Anthony King and Traci Ann Zweck

Chapter 13

#118.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 25
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Wayne Anthony King Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Traci Ann Zweck Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11924

Don Gurule and Elaine Gurule

Chapter 13

#119.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Don Gurule Represented By
Christopher Hewitt
Joint Debtor(s):
Elaine Gurule Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11987

Carmen Lopez

Chapter 13

#120.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18
EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carmen Lopez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13

#1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14954 GLASGOW COURT, Victorville, CA, 92394 Under 11 U.S.C. § 362

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC dba MR. COOPER

EH

Docket 133

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service: Proper Opposition: YES

Debtors dispute that they are behind 9 payments and request a 30-day continuance to establish the payment history.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Joint Debtor(s):
Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Movant(s):
Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By
Dane W Exnowski
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:13-25137

Herbert Anderson, Jr.

Chapter 13

#2.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 2058 Orchard Drive, Perris, CA 92571

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC

From: 11/6/18 EH
Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

Based on the fact that Debtor appears to have completed his Chapter 13 plan, and based on the evidence submitted by Movant which appears to indicate that Debtor has made the last eighteen monthly payments, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent of lifting the automatic stay as it applies to the bankruptcy estate only.
GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3, and 12. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Herbert Anderson Jr. Represented By Todd B Becker
Movant(s):
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. Represented By Michael Daniels
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Herbert Anderson, Jr.

Darlene C Vigil

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:13-26702

Ricardo F Estrellado, Jr and Lilian P Estrellado

Chapter 13

#3.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 27535 Papillion Street #3, Murrieta, CA 92562

EH

Docket 58

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service: Proper Opposition: No

GRANT pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 14-day stay. GRANT as to ¶¶ 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ricardo F Estrellado Jr Represented By Thomas Shanner
Joint Debtor(s):
Lilian P Estrellado Represented By Thomas Shanner
Movant(s):
Nationstar Mortgage LLC, its Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-11151

Jeanne Marie Jackson

Chapter 13

#4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1649 Pinedale Avenue, Bloomington, CA 92316

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 30
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jeanne Marie Jackson Represented By
D Justin Harelik
Movant(s):
Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By
Kristin A Zilberstein Kelly M Raftery Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-17402

Thomas Lee Abercrombie and Rebecca Anne Abercrombie

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Ford Escape; VIN: 1FMCU0H93DUD72995

MOVANT: ALTA VISTA CREDIT UNION

From: 9/11/18 EH
Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Joint Debtor(s):
Rebecca Anne Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Movant(s):
Alta Vista Credit Union Represented By
Bruce P. Needleman
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19565

Cynthia Ramos

Chapter 13

#6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6645 Truman Ct., Chino, California 91710

MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC

EH

Docket 84

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and GRANT order designating Debtor as "borrower" under Cal. Civil Code § 2920.5. DENY request for APO as moot

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cynthia Ramos Represented By Hayk Grigoryan
Movant(s):
SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING Represented By
Carlos R Hernandez-Vivoni Mark S Krause
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20487

Ann Marie Smith

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6140 Sard St, Alta Loma, CA 91701

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

From: 10/16/18 EH
Docket 52
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/29/18
Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT relief from § 1301(a) co-debtor stay. GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written oppositions is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ann Marie Smith Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By Nancy L Lee Jonetta A Graves
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Ann Marie Smith

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-12323

Kevin E Horton and Manuel F. Dela Rosa

Chapter 13

#8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 48258 Chesapeake Pl, Indio, CA 92201

MOVANT: CITIBANK NA

EH

Docket 35
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/5/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Kevin E Horton Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Manuel F. Dela Rosa Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Citibank, N.A. Represented By Robert P Zahradka
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14278

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13

#9.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Scion XB

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

From: 10/2/18, 11/6/18 EH
Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
10/02/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: YES
Parties to indicate whether there has been progress on an agreement for an APO. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David Bruce Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Tina Marie Bremer Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Austin P Nagel
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

David Bruce Bremer and Tina Marie Bremer

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14336

Peter Najim

Chapter 13

#10.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35967 Country Park Dr., Wildomar, CA

MOVANT: CARDENAS THREE LLC

EH

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and DENY request to lift the co-debtor stay as no co-debtor was served. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Peter Najim Represented By
Ivan Trahan
Movant(s):
Cardenas Three, LLC, a California Represented By
Coby Halavais
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14949

Alice Chow

Chapter 13

#11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2010 Ford F250, VIN: 1FTSW2BRXAEA62976

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Alice Chow Represented By
Andrew Nguyen
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc., as Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16064

Michael D. Wickham and JoAnn Y. Wickham

Chapter 13

#12.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Beta 500 RR-S

MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael D. Wickham Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Joint Debtor(s):
JoAnn Y. Wickham Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Movant(s):
LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Michael D. Wickham and JoAnn Y. Wickham

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17099

Carlington Hugh Whyne and Tia Antionette Whyne

Chapter 7

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Tundra

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 17
Tentative Ruling:

11/13/18

Notice: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT pursuant to §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 14-day stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carlington Hugh Whyne Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Tia Antionette Whyne Pro Se
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Austin P Nagel
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Carlington Hugh Whyne and Tia Antionette Whyne

Chapter 7
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17323

Keith T. Marshall and Sonia M. Marshall

Chapter 7

#14.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Dodge Ram, VIN 1C6RD6FT8CS267760

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.

From: 10/16/18 EH
Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court notes that rather than attach the appropriate exhibits, it appears that Movant has inadvertently replaced those exhibits with a second copy of the motion. As a result, Movant has failed to establish that it has a security interest in the subject property nor has Movant established the fair market value of the property. Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY the motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Keith T. Marshall Represented By Christopher J Langley
Joint Debtor(s):
Sonia M. Marshall Represented By Christopher J Langley
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Keith T. Marshall and Sonia M. Marshall

Chapter 7
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17381

Charles Mickey Alligood

Chapter 13

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2010 Hyundai Elantra

MOVANT: QUALITY ACCEPTANCE LLC

CASE DISMISSED 11/8/18

EH

Docket 16
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Mickey Alligood Represented By Alon Darvish
Movant(s):
Quality Acceptance, LLC Represented By Robert S Lampl
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17590

Paul Stephen Fletcher and Gina Apolinar Fletcher

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2006 Chrysler Pacifica, VIN 2A4GM48476R900744

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Paul Stephen Fletcher Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Joint Debtor(s):
Gina Apolinar Fletcher Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Paul Stephen Fletcher and Gina Apolinar Fletcher

Chapter 7
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17769

Kellie C. Baker

Chapter 13

#17.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Toyota Sequoia

MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). DENY request under § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from co- debtor stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Kellie C. Baker Represented By Edward T Weber
Movant(s):
LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17797

Susan Violet Guillot

Chapter 13

#18.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Confirming Termination of Stay under 11
U.S.C. 362(j) or That No Stay is in Effect under 11 U.S.C. 362(c)(4)(A)(ii) 28281 Robert St., Perris, California

MOVANT: MATTHEW GREENE & LORI GREENE

EH

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Notice: Proper Opposition: None

The instant case was filed within one year of the dismissal of the Debtor’s prior case, Case No. 17-15347. Thus, the Debtor was required to seek to continue the stay pursuant to § 362(c)(3). The language of § 362(c)(3) plainly states that the Court cannot extend the stay until "after notice and hearing completed before the expiration of the 30-day period". Here, the 30-day period expired on October 14, 2018, and the hearing on Debtor’s Motion was as held and denied on October 30, 2018. Based on the failure to obtain an order prior to the expiration of the 30-day period, no stay is in effect. The Motion is GRANTED.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Gary S Saunders
Movant(s):
Matthew & Lori Greene Represented By Coby Halavais
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Susan Violet Guillot

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17903

Phillip David Johnson and Miriam Carreon Johnson

Chapter 7

#19.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2011 Mercedes-Benz C Class, VIN WDDGF5EB3BA525982

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Phillip David Johnson Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Joint Debtor(s):
Miriam Carreon Johnson Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Phillip David Johnson and Miriam Carreon Johnson

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17915

Stephanie F Grijalva-Gould

Chapter 7

#20.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 12 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2009 Mitsubishi Galant, VIN 4A3AB36F29E002647

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Stephanie F Grijalva-Gould Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18127

Rudy Avila

Chapter 7

#21.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Chevrolet Equinox, VIN 2GNALBEK7F6416863

MOVANT: ACAR LEASING LTD

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rudy Avila Represented By
Andrew Nguyen
Movant(s):
ACAR Leasing LTD dba GM Represented By Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18142

Arlene Bada

Chapter 7

#22.00 motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Camry

MOVANT: GATEWAY ONE LENDING & FINANCE

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for lifting of co-debtor stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Arlene Bada Represented By
James P Doan
Movant(s):
Gateway One Lending & Finance Represented By
Karel G Rocha
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#23.00 Cont Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 1778 Carr Rd Ste 4A, Calexico, CA 92231

MOVANT: PACIFIC RIM DISTRIBUTION CENTER LLC FROM 10/30/18
EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). DENY request pursuant to § 362(d)
1. for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY all remaining requests for relief for lack of cause shown.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
  Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
  Movant(s):
  Pacific Rim Distribution Center, Represented By
  Kurt Rifbjerg
  10:00 AM
  6:18-18384
  
  Kent Christian
  
  Chapter 7
  
  #24.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Ford F150, VIN 1FTEW1EP1HKC45440
  
  MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE LLC
  
  EH
  
  Docket 9
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/13/18
  Service is Proper Opposition: None
  
  GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and § 362(d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.
  
  APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Kent Christian Represented By David L Nelson
  Movant(s):
  TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By Sheryl K Ith
  Trustee(s):
  Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
  10:00 AM
  6:18-18816
  
  Vadany Sophan
  
  Chapter 13
  
  #25.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 2016 Honda Accord
  
  MOVANT: VADANY SOPHAN
  
  EH
  
  Docket 12
  
  Tentative Ruling:
  11/13/18
  
  The Debtor’s prior case was dismissed for failure to make payment and based on a failure to provide adequate proof of income from employment as an Uber/Lyft Driver. The Debtor has provided evidence that he has obtained new employment with regular income since the prior filing. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion as having overcome the presumption that the case was not filed in good faith.
  
  APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
  Party Information
  Debtor(s):
  Vadany Sophan Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Movant(s):
  Vadany Sophan Represented By Lionel E Giron
  Trustee(s):
  Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
  12:00 PM
  6:18-17533
  
  Antoine Hossein Babai
  
  Chapter 11
  
  #26.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 25 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 71100 Aerie Road, Palm Desert, California 92260 (ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)
  
  MOVANT: ANTOINE HOSSEIN BABAI
  
  EH
  
  Docket 27
  
  Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#27.00 CONT Patient Care Ombudsman's Emergency Motion for Order Approving Review of Confidential Patient Records Under § 333, and Approving Notice to Patients Under Bankruptcy Rule 2015.1(b)
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 10/2/18, 10/30/18 Also #28 - #33
EH

Docket 75

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Jerry Seelig Represented By
Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#28.00 CONT Application to Employ Seelig+Cussigh HCO LLC as Consultant to Patient Care Ombudsman Retroactive to September 13, 2018
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 10/30/18 Also #27 - #33
EH

Docket 101

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Jerry Seelig Represented By
Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#29.00 CONT Application to Employ Perkins Coie LLP as Counsel to Patient Care Ombudsman Retroactive to September 13, 2018
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 10/30/18 Also #27 - #33
EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Jerry Seelig Represented By
Sara Chenetz Bradley A Cosman
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#30.00 Hearing On Amended Notice Of Setting Insider Compensation Of Oscar Brambila
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

Also #27 - #33

EH

Docket 151

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#31.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Payment of PrePetition Payroll Obligations; and (2) Authorizing Debtor to Honor PrePetition Employment Procedures
(FINAL HEARING)
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18, 10/16/18 Also #27 - #33
EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall Ryan W Beall
12:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#32.00 CONT Emergency Motion for Order: (1) Authorizing Debtors to Use Cash Collateral on Interim Basis; (2) Granting Adequate Protection to Secured Creditors; and (3) Scheduling a Final Hearing
(FINAL HEARING)
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 8/20/18, 9/25/18, 10/16/18 Also #27 - #33
EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall Ryan W Beall
12:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
12:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#33.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report
(ADVANCED FROM 2:00 PM CALENDAR)

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18 Also #27 - #32
EH

Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

#34.00 CONT Application for Compensation of Final Fees and/or Expenses with proof of service for Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/11/2016 to 12/5/2016, Fee: $278,079.00, Expenses: $4,603.13

From: 12/19/17, 4/24/18, 10/9/16, 10/16/18

EH

Docket 306
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
11/13/2018
The Application for Compensation was amended on 10/30/2018 to correct errors in the calculations submitted by Applicant. The Application having been corrected and their being no objections by interested party to the Application, finding that the amounts are otherwise reasonable, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Application, allowing fees in the amounts stated in the October 30, 2018, corrected amounts.
APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days. 10/16/18
On May 11, 2016, Allied Injury Management, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On June 6, 2016, the Court approved the employment application of Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP to serve as counsel to Debtor ("Applicant"). On November 17, 2016, the Court approved an application to expand the scope of Applicant’s representation. On November 30, 2018, the Court ordered the appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee and, five days later, David Goodrich was appointed as the Chapter 11 Trustee.

On October 6, 2017, Applicant filed an application for compensation for an aggregate amount of $282,682.13 covering the period of May 11, 2016 to December 5, 2016. Applicant and UST have twice stipulated to a continuance of the hearing.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1), the court may award reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services. The court has an independent duty to review the fee application in the absence of objections. See 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(2). The court "will not indulge in extensive labor and guesswork to justify a fee for an attorney who has not done so himself." In re Taylor, 66 B.R. 390 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1986).

11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. These factors include time spent, rates charged, necessity of the service, reasonableness of the service, expertise of attorney, and comparable market rates.

First of all, the Court notes that Applicant’s fee application is somewhat unclear. The application requests $278,079 for professional fees related to the main bankruptcy case and three adversary proceeding, and a summary identifying the amount of fees in each proceeding is provided on the tables that spans pages 6 and 7 of the fee application. That tables identifies fees in the amount of $242,270.50 in the main case. Nevertheless, the very next table, which deals with categories of tasks performed and spans pages 7-8 of the fee application, only identifies
$227,244.50 in fees for the main case. It does not appear that the fee application addresses or explains this discrepancy of $15,026, and, therefore, the Court is inclined to reduce the fee application by $15,026.

The "Summary of Fees for the Main Case" table is additionally problematic because of the fact that the majority of the rows and tables in this summary do not add up to the identified total. While the miscalculations are not egregious, and are sometimes to the disadvantage of Applicant, the errors force put the credibility of the fee application as a whole, including its more than 100 pages of billing entries, into question. The inherent contradictions of the fee application continue when comparing the summary tables with the more detailed tables in the application’s sections on the adversary matters.

Additionally, the Court notes that the first two pages of Exhibit 4 include billing for services provided which predate the effective date of the employment order. Those billing entries related to services provided by Mr. Lieberman are also lumped entries. For those two reasons, the Court is inclined to reduce the fee application by an additional amount of $6,068.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Otherwise, the Court has reviewed the fee application and finds the requested fees and costs to be generally reasonable. The Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing for Counsel to file an amended application correcting the arithmetical errors and apparent contradictions throughout the fee application.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Movant(s):
Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#35.00 Application for Compensation for Michael Jones, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 3/27/2018 to 10/22/2018, Fee: $54,450, Expenses: $0.00

EH

Docket 87
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 11/27/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
10:00 AM
6:18-16798

Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton

Chapter 7

#1.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and United Auto Credit Corporation re: 2015 Hyundai Sonata

EH

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Renard Louis Hamilton Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Regina Elizabeth Hamilton Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16713

Danny Arthur Goodro and Marina Hernandez Goodro

Chapter 7

#2.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Alaska USA Federal Credit Union re 2014 Chevrolet Cruze

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Danny Arthur Goodro Represented By Dina Farhat
Joint Debtor(s):
Marina Hernandez Goodro Represented By Dina Farhat
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16099

Hugo Ugarte and Teresa Ugarte

Chapter 7

#3.00 Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Ally Financial re 2012 Dodge Durango

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Hugo Ugarte Represented By
Michael H Colmenares
Joint Debtor(s):
Teresa Ugarte Represented By
Michael H Colmenares
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-17888

Jay J. Goodman

Chapter 7

#4.00 Status Conference re Jay Goodman Filing Of September 6, 2018 re Objection re Order Approving Motion For Attorney Fees

EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jay J. Goodman Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:13-23186

Richard C Cox, Jr

Chapter 7

#5.00 CONT Motion for Turnover of Insurance Renewal Commissions From: 8/22/18, 9/12/18
EH

Docket 150
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/19 AT 11:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard C Cox Jr Represented By Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Leonard M Shulman Brandon J Iskander Lynda T Bui
11:00 AM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#6.00 CONT Motion for Consent Order re: Claim of Creditor First Home Bank as Nondischargeable

From: 10/17/18 Also #7
EH

Docket 11
Tentative Ruling:
10/17/18

DISCUSSION

On November 20, 2017 ("Petition Date"), Sean Karadas ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 7 relief. Charles Daff is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). Among the assets of the estate are Small Business Administration loan funds totaling $327,653 (the "SBA Loan") obtained by the Debtor from First Home Bank for his wholly owned corporation, Pacific Trium, Inc. ("Pacific Trium") Trustee has evidence that almost immediately following the disbursement of loan funds to the Debtor, that the Debtor transferred the funds from Pacific Trium’s account to his personal account on May 31, 2017, and then from his account to his son’s account on June 20, 2017.

On May 24, 2018, First Home Bank filed a dischargeability action under §§ 523 and 727 against the Debtor objecting to the discharge of the Debtor’s personal guaranty and alleging fraud and misrepresentation by Debtor in obtaining the SBA Loan.

On September 11, 2018, First Home Bank filed a Motion for Consent Order re: Claim of Creditor First Home Bank as Nondischargeable ("Motion"). The Motion specifically seeks approval of the parties’ stipulation as to nondischargeability of the personal guaranty and separately seeks dismissal of the remaining claims. Although the Motion acknowledges that parties in interest may timely file a response to the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
Motion to pursue the §727 action, the Motion is deficient in that the proof of service fails to indicate service on the Debtor’s creditors. To date, the Court’s claims register reflects that 17 claims have been filed against the Debtor’s estate and as such, there are interested parties who may be interested in pursuing the §727 action.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the hearing on the Motion to November 14, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. for the Debtor to serve the Debtor’s creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Sean Karadas Pro Se
Movant(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Plaintiff(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#7.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01123. Complaint by First Home Bank against Sean Karadas. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))(Kastan, Joshua)

From: 7/25/18, 10/24/18 Also #6
EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Sean Karadas Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
CONT...

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
11:00 AM
6:18-16362

Lisa Caron

Chapter 13

#8.00 Motion to Dismiss Case for Abuse EH
Docket 22
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lisa Caron Represented By
Bruce A Wilson
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-12440

Paul Pound

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01147 Lloyd v. Pound

#9.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by April Lloyd against Paul M Pound. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a) (4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

From: 9/5/18 Also #10
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/5/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Paul Pound Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Paul M Pound Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
April Lloyd Represented By
Chane Buck
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-12440

Paul Pound

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01147 Lloyd v. Pound

#10.00 Motion For Summary Judgment Also #9
EH

Docket 6
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/5/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Paul Pound Represented By
Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Paul M Pound Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
April Lloyd Represented By
Chane Buck
Plaintiff(s):
April Lloyd Represented By
Chane Buck
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-12282

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01141 Balderas et al v. Valderrama

#11.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Motion to dismiss First Amended Complaint

Also #12 EH
Docket 12
Tentative Ruling:
11/14/18
BACKGROUND

On March 21, 2018, Frank Valderrama ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 2, 2018, Debtor received a discharge.

On June 25, 2018, Elizabeth Balderas & Jose Carrillo (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint against Debtor for non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2) (A).

On July 17, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On August 10, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their opposition. On September 10, 2018, the Court granted the motion, dismissing the complaint with leave to amend.

On September 28, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint (the "FAC"). On
2:00 PM
CONT...

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7
October 19, 2018, Debtor filed another motion to dismiss. On October 31, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their opposition.

DISCUSSION
1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
  
  In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Civil Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, would "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when a court can draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct. Id. The plaintiff must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id.
2. NON-DISCHARGEABILITY STANDARD
As a preliminary note, the Court notes that the format and opposition of the FAC is rather confusing. The adversary proceeding cover sheet and the first page of the complaint identify the complaint as a non-dischargeability complaint under 11 U.S.C.
§ 523(a)(2) [not itself an actual provision] and § 523(a)(2)(A); three causes of action are likewise identified: (1) breach of written contract; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; and
1. fraud.
  
  The adversary cover sheet, in the section titled "nature of suit," also checks § 523(a) (4). As was made clear in the previous motion to dismiss tentative ruling, the Court will not address a cause of action which is not clearly asserted in the complaint. Here, once again, Plaintiffs have not actually mentioned § 523(a)(4) in the entirety of the complaint, and, therefore, the Court will construe the FAC as solely a request under § 523(a)(2)(A). As a result, the Court will not address Debtor’s argument that Plaintiffs
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Frank Javier Valderrama
  
  Chapter 7
  are time-barred from bringing a § 523(a)(4) claim.
  
  11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) states:
  1. A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt –
    1. for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of creditor, to the extent obtained by –
      1. false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;
    The elements of a § 523(a)(2)(A) claim are well-established: (a) the debtor made representations; (b) which were known to be false; (c) the representations were made with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (d) the creditor relied on such representations; (e) the creditor sustained loss and damage as a proximate result of the representations. See, e.g., In re Sabban, 600 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir. 2010).
    
    As noted by Debtor, FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b) is applicable to a § 523(a)(2)(A) non- dischargeability proceeding. See, e.g., In re Kimmel, 2008 WL 5076380 at *1 (9th Cir. 2008). "In order to properly plead fraud with particularity, the complaint must allege the time, place, and content of the fraudulent representation such that a defendant can prepare an adequate response to the allegations." Id.
    
    Here, while its organization is rather confusing, the FAC has made substantial progress towards addressing the concerns raised regarding the original complaint. Specifically, the FAC does contain allegations which, if liberally construed, amount to a false representation of a material fact. For example, paragraph 35 states:
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Frank Javier Valderrama
    
    Chapter 7
    
    Each time Plaintiffs made a payment, Debtor assured them that progress was being made on the project. Debtor assured them that materials and construction were being expended [sic] with the money he received from Plaintiffs. Such representations were false in that in his meeting of the credits [sic] Debtor testified under oath that he did not use any money he received by Plaintiffs to pay for material or labor.
    
    The FAC also contains different variations, in different locations, of the following assertion, found in ¶ 41: "Debtor intentionally withheld the true information from Plaintiffs so that Plaintiffs continue [sic] to pay Debtor." Regarding the element of reliance, the Court notes that ¶ 32 concludes by stating: "Plaintiffs would not have paid Debtor additional funds had they known that Debtor was keeping the money for himself," which could be construed as alleging reliance on the part of Plaintiffs.
    Debtor has not argued that Plaintiffs have failed to adequately allege damages, and it seems clear that the element of damages had been adequately asserted.
    
    Turning to the heightened pleading standard of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b), it would appear that the FAC, if liberally construed, does contain allegations of fraudulent representations with sufficient particularity. Specifically, for example, paragraph 35, reproduced above, appears to allege that Debtor asserted he was spending the money on materials and constructions each time that a payment was made. Given that paragraphs ¶¶ 36 and 38 identify a list of dates when payments were made, it would appear that, taking the FAC as a whole, there are adequate assertions of a particular representation, made by a particular person, on a particular date.
    
    In Debtor’s motion to dismiss, Debtor appears to assert that the FAC fails to plead fraud with particularity because "[t]here is no allegation that any payment was made as a result of any specific misrepresentation." [Dkt. No. 12, pg. 8]. As the Court noted above, there are certain sections of the FAC, such as ¶ 32, which assert that Debtor would not have made payments to Debtor, if not for Debtor’s representation that the money was being spent on materials and construction. It would appear that such allegations are adequate to allege fraud with particularity. The Court declines to address Debtor’s argument that Plaintiffs cannot establish reasonable reliance because
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Frank Javier Valderrama
    
    Chapter 7
    the reasonableness of such reliance is a factual issue not ripe for determination at this time.
    
    Debtor also argues that the first cause of action, breach of contract, should be dismissed as a matter of law because the cause of action is not a basis to hold a debt to be non-dischargeable. The Court notes, however, that the tentative ruling of August 29, 2018, pointed out that if Plaintiffs wished to obtain a money judgment, Plaintiffs would need to articulate the legal basis for that debt so that the Court would have a basis to liquidate the debt. While it is not clear from the face of the FAC, it would appear that the cause of action for breach of contract was not intended to serve as a basis for non-dischargeability, but, rather, a basis for a money judgment. Furthermore, given the references to state law and the absence of any reference to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4), it appears that the second cause of action, for breach of fiduciary duty, also may serve the same purpose. While it is debatable whether "breach of contract" and "breach of fiduciary duty" should serve as independent causes of action, the Court understands them to serve as simply providing the legal basis of the alleged debt, which would only be relevant if Plaintiffs were to prevail on the § 523(a)(2)(A) claim.
    
    Finally, the Court agrees with Debtor that Elizabeth Balderas lacks standing because she is neither a party to the contract nor an express beneficiary thereof. Plaintiffs argue that: "The contract was entered into during the marriage, therefore, it is community property. Certainly, Plaintiff Balderas has a right to recover money paid to Debtor whether by her individually or her deceased husband which was paid with community funds." [Dkt. No. 15, pg 13]. This appears to be incorrect as a matter of law. See, e.g., Hatchwell v. Blue Shield of California, 198 Cal. App. 3d 1027, 1036 (Cal. Ct. App.
    1988) ("Denise contends that she may maintain the action pursuant to her community property interest in the contract . . . In Austero v. Nat’l Casualty Co., 62 Cal. App 3d 511 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976), the court rejected this contention, stating: ‘Whatever plaintiff’s property rights with respect to the policies may be, the fact remains that she is not a party to the contracts."); see also Gutierrez v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 2012 WL 398828 at *3 (N.D. Cal. 2012) ("[Community property statutory presumptions] do not, however, confer standing on a non-contracting spouse.").
    
    To the extent that Plaintiffs argue that Elizabeth Balderas was a party to the contract or the partnership agreement, the Court rejects such assertions as implausible given that Plaintiffs have attached a copy of the contract which shows that Elizabeth
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Frank Javier Valderrama
    
    Chapter 7
    Balderas was not a party. Plaintiffs counsel is requested to review FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9011(b), and is reminded that factual misrepresentations or frivolous legal arguments may warrant sanctions.
    
    TENTATIVE RULING
    
    The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent of dismissing Elizabeth Balderas from the action, with leave to amend, and otherwise DENY the motion.
    
    APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
    Party Information
    Debtor(s):
    Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Defendant(s):
    Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Movant(s):
    Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
    Plaintiff(s):
    Elizabeth Balderas Represented By John F Bazan
    Jose Carrillo Represented By
    John F Bazan
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    Trustee(s):
    
    Frank Javier Valderrama
    
    Chapter 7
    Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
    2:00 PM
    6:18-12282
    
    Frank Javier Valderrama
    
    Chapter 7
    Adv#: 6:18-01141 Balderas et al v. Valderrama
    
    #12.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01141. Complaint by Elizabeth Balderas, Jose Carrillo against Frank Javier Valderrama. 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)
    
    From: 8/29/18 Also #11
    EH
    
    Docket 1
    *** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 9/10/18
    Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Defendant(s):
Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Plaintiff(s):
Elizabeth Balderas Represented By John F Bazan
Jose Carrillo Represented By
John F Bazan
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#13.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for failure to state a claim Also #14
EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Mona Gerges Represented By
Louis J Esbin
Rafet Gerges Represented By
Louis J Esbin
St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01064 Gerges et al v. Bastorous et al

#14.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Adversary case 6:18-ap-01064. Complaint by Mona Gerges, Rafet Gerges, St. Mary Properties, LLC against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. False pretenses, False representation, actual fraud, 67- Dischargeability - 523(a)(4); Fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), Willful and malicious injury

From: 5/9/18, 5/16/18, 7/11/18, 8/22/18, 10/31/18

Also #13 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Mona Gerges Represented By
Louis J Esbin
Rafet Gerges Represented By
Louis J Esbin
St. Mary Properties, LLC Represented By Louis J Esbin
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-10724

Bausman and Company Incorporated

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01179 WHITMORE v. Strata Forest Products, Inc.

#15.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01179. Complaint by ROBERT S WHITMORE against Strata Forest Products, Inc.. (Charge To Estate - $350.00). Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(91 (Declaratory judgment)) (Djang, Caroline)

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 10/25/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
William A Smelko
Defendant(s):
Strata Forest Products, Inc. Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
ROBERT S WHITMORE Represented By Caroline Djang
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By
Best Best & Krieger Caroline Djang
2:00 PM
6:17-10724

Bausman and Company Incorporated

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01180 Whitmore v. Sierra Forest Products, Inc. dba Atlas Lumber

#16.00 Status Conference Re: Adversary Complaint by Robert S. Whitmore against Sierra Forest Products, Inc. dba Atlas Lumber. (Charge To Estate $350.00). Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference, 91 - Declaratory judgment

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Bausman and Company Incorporated Represented By
William A Smelko
Defendant(s):
Sierra Forest Products, Inc. dba Atlas Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Robert S. Whitmore Represented By Caroline Djang
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By
Best Best & Krieger Caroline Djang
2:00 PM
6:13-14986

David Wayne Wakefield

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01288 Grobstein v. Wakefield

#17.00 Motion for Attorney's Fees Incurred in Enforcing a Judgment EH
Docket 54

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
David Wayne Wakefield Represented By Jordan Nils Bursch
Robert E Huttenhoff
Defendant(s):
Elise Wakefield Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Elise Wakefield Represented By Jordan Nils Bursch
Robert E Huttenhoff
Movant(s):
Howard Grobstein Represented By Alan W Forsley
Plaintiff(s):
Howard Grobstein Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

David Wayne Wakefield

Alan W Forsley

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#18.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement filed by Liberty Orthopedic Corporation

Also #19 - #21

EH

Docket 98

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Movant(s):
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#19.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted filed by OIC Medical Corporation

Also #18 - #21

EH

Docket 99

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Movant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#20.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement Universal Orthopaedic Group

Also #18 - #21

EH

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Movant(s):
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#21.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by
A. Cisneros against OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC CORPORATION, a California corporation, UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18, 8/22/18, 10/31/18

Also #18 - #20

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Chapter 7
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
11:00 AM
6:10-20626

Irma Cantu

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:17-01057 Cantu v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC et al

#1.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01057. Complaint by Irma Cantu against Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(72 (Injunctive relief - other)) (Cravens, Leonard)

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Irma Cantu Represented By
Leonard J Cravens
Defendant(s):
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Pro Se
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By Adam N Barasch
Plaintiff(s):
Irma Cantu Represented By
Leonard J Cravens
Trustee(s):
Rod (MJ) Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-14867

Richard Cornelius

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01178 United States Of America v. Cornelius

#2.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01178. Complaint by United States Of America against Richard Cornelius. (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) (Levey, Elan)

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/10/19 AT 11:00 AM
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard Cornelius Represented By Paul Y Lee
Defendant(s):
Richard Cornelius Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Naomi Rodriguez-Cornelius Represented By Paul Y Lee
Plaintiff(s):
United States Of America Represented By Elan S Levey
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17351

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01181 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC et al

#3.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding to Determine Extent and Validity of Lien, Request for Declaratory Judgment, and Request for Injunctive Relief for Lack of Standing, Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Discretionary Abstention, and Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief can be Granted

EH

Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Loancare LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Movant(s):
Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Loancare LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Plaintiff(s):
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17351

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

#4.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/8/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/27/18, 10/25/18
Also #6 EH
Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-12567

Jaelyn Roylene Young

Chapter 13

#6.00 Order to show cause why case should not be dismissed Also #5
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jaelyn Roylene Young Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-12622

Karen Jannette Rimola

Chapter 13

#7.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Karen Jannette Rimola Represented By Norma Duenas
Movant(s):
Karen Jannette Rimola Represented By Norma Duenas Norma Duenas
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13

#8.00 CONT Motion of U.S. Trustee for the Entry of an Order Requiring Nationstar Mortgage LLC to Provide an Escrow Account Reconciliation Statement & Related Relief

From: 6/28/18, 8/30/18, 11/8/18 EH
Docket 113
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Joint Debtor(s):
Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-19067

Denise Valencia

Chapter 13

#9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 13820 Ellis Park Trail Eastvale, CA 92880

MOVANT: SHERRI SHAFIZADEH

CASE DISMISSED 11/13/18

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Denise Valencia Pro Se
Movant(s):
Sherri S Shafizadeh Represented By Barry L O'Connor
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:16-19018

Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz

Chapter 13

#10.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a Rights and Responsibilities Agreement (RARA) for Danny K Agai, Creditor's Attorney, Period: to, Fee: $1100.00, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:
11/15/18

On October 10, 2016, Ingeborg Preisendanz ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On November 21, 2016, Debtor’s Chapter 13 case was confirmed.

On September 22, 2018, Debtor’s attorney, Danny Agai ("Applicant"), filed an application for compensation requesting $1,100. Applicant requests $350 for opposing a motion to dismiss (approved by Trustee) and $750 for opposing a motion for relief from the automatic stay. On September 25, 2018, Trustee filed comments requesting billing records to justify the $750 for opposition to the motion for relief from the automatic stay. On October 6, 2018, Applicant filed a supplemental exhibit with billing records. On October 22, 2018, Applicant set the matter for hearing.

The Court notes that the billing records provided by Applicant contain lumped entries. Nevertheless, in the absence of any further objection by Trustee, noting the apparent reasonableness of the fees charged, and that Applicant was successful in getting the motion for relief from stay denied, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the fees in their entirety.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz Tentative Ruling:

Chapter 13

Subject to further objection by Trustee, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the application.

Debtor(s):
APPERANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz Represented By
Danny K Agai
Movant(s):
Ingeborg Margarete Preisendanz Represented By
Danny K Agai
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16804

Adam Brian Britt and Kenya Lashawn Britt

Chapter 13

#11.00 Motion for Authority to Incur Debt (Ch 13) EH
Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Adam Brian Britt Represented By Scott Kosner
Joint Debtor(s):
Kenya Lashawn Britt Represented By Scott Kosner
Movant(s):
Adam Brian Britt Represented By Scott Kosner
Kenya Lashawn Britt Represented By Scott Kosner
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13

#12.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/25/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16489

Rebecca Moore

Chapter 13

#13.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rebecca Moore Represented By Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-12149

Irma Dalia Cantu

Chapter 13

#14.00 CONT Debtor's Motion for Order Disallowing Claim no 1-1 filed by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

From: 6/4/18, 8/30/18 EH

Docket 24

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens
Movant(s):
Irma Dalia Cantu Represented By Leonard J Cravens Leonard J Cravens
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17624

Jose Antonio Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13

#15.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Antonio Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai
Joint Debtor(s):
Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17633

Debra Kristeen Schuler

Chapter 13

#16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Debra Kristeen Schuler Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17635

David Bloch and Sarah Bloch

Chapter 13

#17.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
David Bloch Represented By
Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Sarah Bloch Represented By
Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17646

Belinda Pastran

Chapter 13

#18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Belinda Pastran Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17660

Sharon Lee Martinez

Chapter 13

#19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sharon Lee Martinez Represented By Nancy Korompis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17671

J Jesus Hernandez

Chapter 13

#20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
J Jesus Hernandez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17676

Patricia Ellen Bond-Gomez

Chapter 13

#21.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Patricia Ellen Bond-Gomez Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17677

Chadwick Otieno Ochieng and Christine Achieng Matoka

Chapter 13

#22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Chadwick Otieno Ochieng Represented By John F Brady
Joint Debtor(s):
Christine Achieng Matoka Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17680

Ignacio Diaz

Chapter 13

#23.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ignacio Diaz Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17681

Cameron Hudson

Chapter 13

#24.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Cameron Hudson Represented By Stuart R Simone
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17687

Moises Alvarez and Martha Alvarez

Chapter 13

#25.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/14/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Moises Alvarez Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Martha Alvarez Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17700

Nick Caropino

Chapter 13

#26.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nick Caropino Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17714

Jon Patrick Park

Chapter 13

#27.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jon Patrick Park Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17717

Jesus Gutierrez

Chapter 13

#28.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jesus Gutierrez Represented By
Inez Tinoco-Vaca
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17721

Maribel Villarreal

Chapter 13

#29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Maribel Villarreal Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17732

DeBora Debbie Walker

Chapter 13

#30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
DeBora Debbie Walker Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17735

Carlos Garcia

Chapter 13

#31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17737

Juan Aguilera

Chapter 13

#32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 9/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Juan Aguilera Represented By A Mina Tran
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17769

Kellie C. Baker

Chapter 13

#33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Kellie C. Baker Represented By Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17784

David John Stoykovich, Jr. and Merlina Lynn Burton

Chapter 13

#34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
David John Stoykovich Jr. Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Merlina Lynn Burton Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17797

Susan Violet Guillot

Chapter 13

#35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Susan Violet Guillot Represented By Gary S Saunders
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17832

Laura Darice Jambazian

Chapter 13

#36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Laura Darice Jambazian Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17854

Billy Joe Osuna

Chapter 13

#37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Billy Joe Osuna Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17862

Diana L Montaya

Chapter 13

#38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/5/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Diana L Montaya Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17869

Michael Ferriola

Chapter 13

#39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Ferriola Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17871

Dennis McKusick

Chapter 13

#40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/12/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Dennis McKusick Represented By Michael Avanesian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17874

Javier Valadez

Chapter 13

#41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Javier Valadez Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17876

Maria Mercado

Chapter 13

#42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria Mercado Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17878

Sumanta Chakravarti and Madhumita Chakravarti

Chapter 13

#43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sumanta Chakravarti Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Madhumita Chakravarti Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17883

Norberto Calalay Jimenez and Araceli Corrales Jimenez

Chapter 13

#44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Norberto Calalay Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
Joint Debtor(s):
Araceli Corrales Jimenez Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17886

Ricky Antonio Scott and Shemida Shiloni Scott

Chapter 13

#45.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ricky Antonio Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
Joint Debtor(s):
Shemida Shiloni Scott Represented By Eva M Hollands
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17927

Ertun Reshat and Hale Reshat

Chapter 13

#46.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ertun Reshat Represented By
April E Roberts
Joint Debtor(s):
Hale Reshat Represented By
April E Roberts
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17938

Catalina J Alvarez

Chapter 13

#47.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Catalina J Alvarez Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17946

Erika Lynn Pruitt

Chapter 13

#48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Erika Lynn Pruitt Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17953

Stacy Scott Patton, Sr

Chapter 13

#49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Stacy Scott Patton Sr Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17995

Jingyi Luo

Chapter 13

#50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/9/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jingyi Luo Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18002

Jennifer Romero

Chapter 13

#51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jennifer Romero Represented By James T Lillard
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-14882

Hazel Harrison

Chapter 13

#52.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Hazel Harrison Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-11597

Taylor J. Bretz

Chapter 13

#53.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 223

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Taylor J. Bretz Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-19913

Martin Caballero and Clementina Caballero

Chapter 13

#54.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 136

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Martin Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres
Joint Debtor(s):
Clementina Caballero Represented By Luis G Torres
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-13218

Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz

Chapter 13

#55.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 121
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-13811

Christopher Lee Sumners

Chapter 13

#56.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 86
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Christopher Lee Sumners Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-11794

ROBERT A HAGUE and DIANNE L HAGUE

Chapter 13

#57.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 115
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/31/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
ROBERT A HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
Joint Debtor(s):
DIANNE L HAGUE Represented By Manfred Schroer
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-17536

Gracey Hunter

Chapter 13

#58.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 80

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gracey Hunter Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13

#59.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 116

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-13608

Warren Alan Hall and Kelly Suzanne Hall

Chapter 13

#60.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency EH
Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Warren Alan Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
Joint Debtor(s):
Kelly Suzanne Hall Represented By Lionel E Giron
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-13917

Teresa A Salvail and Michael D Salvail

Chapter 13

#61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Teresa A Salvail Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Michael D Salvail Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-14744

Cirenio Merida

Chapter 13

#62.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 34
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cirenio Merida Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15285

Trevor D. Washington and Sandra Washington

Chapter 13

#63.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 32
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/8/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Trevor D. Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Sandra Washington Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15772

Annette Leshon Rudd

Chapter 13

#64.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 10/18/18
EH

Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Annette Leshon Rudd Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-13714

Jose Martinez and Aurora Martinez

Chapter 13

#65.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Aurora Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-13793

Michael Moreno and Azucena Moreno

Chapter 13

#66.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Moreno Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Azucena Moreno Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-14340

Lawrence A McCoy

Chapter 13

#67.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Lawrence A McCoy Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:14-18622

Saul Bautista

Chapter 13

#1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 11 Della Cava Lane, Lake Elsinore, California 92532

MOVANT: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCATION

EH

Docket 49
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/15/18 AT 10:00 AM
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Saul Bautista Represented By
James T Lillard
Movant(s):
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. Represented By
Grace Chang-Rodriguez Ann Nguyen
Kennessa C Hartin Delesia Graham Gilbert R Yabes
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-13652

David Wark and Michelle Wark

Chapter 13

#2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 51910 Avenida Alvarado, La Quinta, California 92253-3190

MOVANT: CITIMORTGAGE, INC.

EH

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3.
DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
David Wark Represented By
Christopher Hewitt
Joint Debtor(s):
Michelle Wark Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
CitiMortgage, Inc. Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

David Wark and Michelle Wark

Anthony C Kesterson Helen L Williams Cheryl A Knapmeyer Robert P Zahradka

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-14501

Vonetta M Mays

Chapter 13

#3.00 otice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2011 JEEP COMPASS, VIN: 1J4N F1FB 4BD2 10495

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK

EH

Docket 198

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vonetta M Mays Represented By Christopher J Langley
Movant(s):
MECHANICS BANK Represented By Vincent V Frounjian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-10048

Margaret Crain

Chapter 13

#4.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3300 Mary Ellen Dr, Riverside, California 92509-0816

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

CASE DISMISSED 11/1/18

From: 5/15/18, 6/26/18, 8/1/18, 8/21/18, 10/16/18

EH

Docket 66
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/1/18
Tentative Ruling: Tentative Ruling:
5/15/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

Parties to apprise Court regarding extent of arrears and status of adequate protection discussions, if any.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Margaret Crain Represented By Yelena Gurevich
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Margaret Crain

Jamie D Hanawalt Jessica L Carter Tavon Taylor

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-18820

Chase D Chung

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 60231 La Mirada Trail, Joshua Tree, California 92252

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

From: 11/6/18 EH
Docket 73

Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chase D Chung Represented By Daniel C Sever
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Represented By Shreena Augustin Seth Greenhill April Harriott Theron S Covey Sean C Ferry
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Chase D Chung

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-13523

Loretta Chavis

Chapter 13

#6.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 837 Michigan Ave, Beaumont, CA 92223

MOVANT: SUN WEST MORTGAGE COMPANY INC

EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2, 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Loretta Chavis Represented By Dan Perry
Movant(s):
Sun West Mortgage Company, Inc., Represented By
Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19291

Carolyn Maxine Bodden

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: for property located at 370 Claremont St Hemet, CA 92545

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

From: 10/16/18, 11/6/18 EH
Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carolyn Maxine Bodden Represented By Edward G Topolski
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-20382

Raymond Ballejos and Veronica Ballejos

Chapter 13

#8.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1820 Michigan St, Colton CA 92324-1327

MOVANT: QUICKEN LOANS INC

CASE DISMISSED 10/18/18

EH

Docket 53
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/18/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Raymond Ballejos Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Joint Debtor(s):
Veronica Ballejos Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Movant(s):
Quicken Loans Inc., its successors Represented By
Nichole Glowin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-10079

Cheryl Linda Fernandez

Chapter 13

#9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 425 Grant Street, Redlands, California 92373

MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB

EH

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because Movant has failed to serve the co-debtor at the address identified in Schedule H. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cheryl Linda Fernandez Represented By Matthew D. Resnik
Movant(s):
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
Kelsey X Luu Jamie D Hanawalt
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Cheryl Linda Fernandez

Gilbert R Yabes

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-13327

Ridge B. M. Robert

Chapter 7

#10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Toyota Camry, VIN 4T4BF1FK2DR298847

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

EH

Docket 77
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/21/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ridge B. M. Robert Represented By Gene Koon
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-13503

John L Velasquez and Christi J Velasquez

Chapter 13

#11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 3124 Oakview Lane

MOVANT: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of adequate protection discussions, if any. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
John L Velasquez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Christi J Velasquez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Represented By
Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14770

Lamar Ramon Benjamin

Chapter 13

#12.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 17455 Kentucky Derby Drive, Moreno Valley, California 92555

MOVANT: WVMF FUNDING LLC

From: 11/6/18 EH
Docket 30
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/20/18
Tentative Ruling:
11/6/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lamar Ramon Benjamin Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Movant(s):
WVMF Funding, LLC Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16064

Michael D. Wickham and JoAnn Y. Wickham

Chapter 13

#13.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Beta 500 RR-S

MOVANT: LBS FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION

From: 11/13/18 EH
Docket 30
*** VACATED *** REASON: STIPULATED APO ENTERED 11/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT relief from the co-debtor stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael D. Wickham Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Joint Debtor(s):
JoAnn Y. Wickham Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Movant(s):
LBS Financial Credit Union Represented By Karel G Rocha
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Michael D. Wickham and JoAnn Y. Wickham

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17421

Michelle Barrera

Chapter 7

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Camry

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michelle Barrera Represented By Paul Y Lee
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17986

Crystal Del Rosario

Chapter 7

#15.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Mercedes-Benz C300W, VIN # 55SWF4JBXFU092680

MOVANT: MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA LLC

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Crystal Del Rosario Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Movant(s):
Mercedes-Benz Financial Services Represented By
Rebecca A Caley
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18520

Charles Dennis West

Chapter 7

#16.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35662 Crossroads Street, Wildomar Area, CA 92595

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The instant case was dismissed on October 29, 2018, and, as a result, the automatic stay terminated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. S 362(c)(1)-(2). Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY all requests for relief which are not in rem requests as moot. The Court is inclined to DENY relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) for lack of cause shown.
Movant’s proffered bases for a bad faith finding are: (1) multiple filings affecting the property; and (2) that the instant filing was a skeletal filing. Regarding Debtor’s previous filings, Debtor had a case summarily dismissed more than six years ago, and had an additional case dismissed in May 2018 after completing approximately half of his Chapter 13 plan. Debtor’s recent history does not evince an abuse of the bankruptcy protections. Furthermore, the instant skeletal filing does not, of itself, appear to warrant a bad faith finding.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Dennis West Pro Se
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Charles Dennis West

Chapter 7
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Gilbert R Yabes
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18688

Jose F. Escobar

Chapter 7

#17.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2018 Ford Mustang Eco-boost

MOVANT: THE GOLDEN 1 CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT relief from Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose F. Escobar Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
Golden 1 Credit Union Represented By Mirco J Haag
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18810

Jennifer Marie Silva

Chapter 13

#18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 309 Cheshire Lane, Hemet, California 92544 [In Rem]

MOVANT: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from stay pursuant to § 362(d)(4) based on nine bankruptcy cases affecting the property in the past two years and multiple unauthorized transfers of a fractionalized interest in property. GRANT waiver of the Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4)(A)(i), the automatic stay never went into effect in the instant case, and therefore the Court is inclined to DENY all remaining requests as moot.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jennifer Marie Silva Pro Se
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association, not Represented By
Erin M McCartney
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Jennifer Marie Silva

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19017

Hortencia Gallardo

Chapter 7

#19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 HONDA CIVIC, VIN: 2HGF C2F7 6HH5 17281

MOVANT: HONDA LEASE TRUST

EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)
(1) and (2). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2. DENY alternative request under ¶ 11 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Hortencia Gallardo Pro Se
Movant(s):
HONDA LEASE TRUST Represented By Vincent V Frounjian
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19147

Miguel Angel Huape

Chapter 7

#20.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 557 Casey Court, Colton CA

MOVANT: MARIA JA JAUREGUI

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request under ¶ 2.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Miguel Angel Huape Represented By Khushwant Sean Singh
Movant(s):
Maria Ja Jauregui Represented By Helen G Long
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19400

Maria D Valdez Quintero

Chapter 13

#21.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 29104 Escalante Road Sun City, CA 92587

MOVANT: MARIA D VALDEZ QUINTERO

EH

Docket 6
Tentative Ruling: 11/27/2018
The Court having reviewed the motion, good cause appearing, and noting the lack of any opposition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, CONTINING the automatic stay as to all creditors.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria D Valdez Quintero Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.
Movant(s):
Maria D Valdez Quintero Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr. Jaime A Cuevas Jr. Jaime A Cuevas Jr. Jaime A Cuevas Jr.
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18622

Jackie May Zapata

Chapter 13

#22.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate re 2003 Volvo Sedan S40 and 29706 Stonewood Rd Temecula, CA 92591

MOVANT: JACKIE MAY ZAPATA

From: 11/8/18 EH
Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jackie May Zapata Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Jackie May Zapata Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

#23.00 CONT Application for Compensation of Final Fees and/or Expenses with proof of service for Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/11/2016 to 12/5/2016, Fee: $278,079.00, Expenses: $4,603.13

From: 12/19/17, 4/24/18, 10/9/16, 10/16/18, 11/13/18

Also #24 & #25 EH
Docket 306

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

The Application for Compensation was amended by Applicant's reply filed on 10/30/2018 to correct errors in the calculations submitted by Applicant. The Application having been corrected, the amounts requested now appear reasonable, and the Court is inclined to GRANT the Application, allowing fees in the amount of $280,618.13 in fees and expenses, and approving payment in the amount of
$171,044.63 (to the extent funds are available). APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Movant(s):
Fredman Lieberman Pearl LLP Represented By Alan W Forsley
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

#24.00 CONT First Omnibus Objection of Debtor-In-Possession Allied Injury Management, Inc. Seeking Disallowance of Certain Proofs of Claim (Holding Date)

From: 11/8/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 3/7/17,4/4/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18, 9/25/18

Also #23 & #25 EH
Docket 83

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Movant(s):
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11

#25.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 6/7/16, 8/30/16, 9/14/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, 12/6/16, 1/10/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18, 9/25/18

Also #23 & #24 EH
Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:16-01225 Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC v. Allied Injury Management,

#26.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Cambridge Medical Funding Group II, LLC against Allied Injury Management, Inc., John C. Larson. 02 - Other e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy
HOLDING DATE

From: 11/1/16, 12/6/16, 1/31/17, 2/28/17, 3/28/17, 5/30/17, 8/29/17, 10/3/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18, 9/25/18

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
John C. Larson Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Cambridge Medical Funding Group Represented By
Kenneth Hennesay
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth

Chapter 11
2:00 PM
6:16-14273

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:16-01279 Allied Injury Management, Inc. v. One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group

#27.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01279. Complaint by Allied Injury Management, Inc. against One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group & Therapy, Inc., One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Group, Inc., Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Group, Inc.. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Account Stated; and (3) Unjust Enrichment Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 1/24/17, 3/7/17, 4/25/17, 6/27/17, 7/11/17, 9/12/17, 11/14/17, 11/28/17, 1/30/18, 4/10/18, 4/24/18, 6/26/18, 9/25/18

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
One Stop Multi-Specialty Medical Represented By
Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
Nor Cal Pain Management Medical Represented By
Maria K Pum Maria C Armenta
2:00 PM
CONT...

Allied Injury Management, Inc.

Chapter 11
Plaintiff(s):
Allied Injury Management, Inc. Represented By Alan W Forsley
Trustee(s):
David M Goodrich (TR) Represented By Mark S Horoupian Jason Balitzer Victor A Sahn Steven Werth
2:00 PM
6:16-19993

B & B Family, Incorporated

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:18-01116 Forte v. B & B Family, Incorporated

#28.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01116. Complaint by Patricia Forte against B & B Family, Incorporated

From: 7/24/18, 7/31/18, 10/9/18, 10/16/18

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/29/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci Julie Philippi
Defendant(s):
B & B Family, Incorporated Represented By Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Patricia Forte Represented By
D Edward Hays Laila Masud
2:00 PM
6:17-15717

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11

#29.00 Application for Compensation Application for Compensation And Reimbursement Of Final Fees And Expenses of Lozano Law Center, Inc., Per 11 U.S.C. § 330; Declarations Of David Lozano, Esq. And Joe Ruvalcava Support Thereof (With Proof of Service) for David Lozano, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/19/2017 to 10/10/2018, Fee: $93,279.00, Expenses: $988.60.

EH

Docket 171

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

On July 7, 2017, AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On October 10, 2017, the Court approved the employment application of Lozano Law Center, Inc. ("Applicant") to serve as counsel to Debtor. Debtor’s first amended disclosure statement was approved on June 6, 2018, and Debtor’s first amended plan of reorganization was confirmed on August 3, 2018. No interim fee applications have been filed by Applicant.

On November 5, 2018, Applicant filed an application for compensation, requesting allowance and payment of $119,279 in fees (less a retainer of $26,000) and $988.60 in expenses. No opposition have been filed.

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1), the court may award reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services. The court has an independent duty to review the fee application in the absence of objections. See 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(2). The court "will not indulge in extensive labor and guesswork to justify a fee for an attorney who has not done so himself." In re Taylor, 66 B.R. 390 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1986).

11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. These factors include time spent, rates charged, necessity of the service, reasonableness of the service, expertise of attorney, and comparable market rates.
2:00 PM
CONT...

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11

First, the Court notes that the instant case was filed on July 7, 2017. Applicant’s employment application, filed August 22, 2017, explicitly requested authorization for Debtor to employ Applicant, nunc pro tunc, effective July 7, 2017. The Court’s order granting the employment application, entered October 10, 2017, reflects that employment is effective July 7, 2017. Nevertheless, Applicant has billed for substantial work completed prepetition. The billing entries submitted by Applicant reflected that Applicant billed $9,984 for work completed prior to the effective date of employment, which the Court is inclined to strike as outside the scope of the employment order entered by the Court.

Second, the Court notes that the fee application contains numerous, unambiguously lumped entries, which is prohibited by Local Rule 2016-1(a)(1)(E)
(iii) and applicable case law. For instance, one single entry, dated March 23, 2018, states the following: "Discuss available dates with court clerk. Discuss bank account information with Debtor. Prepare proposed deadlines and amend the motion, Disclosure Statement and Plan. Discussed Adequate Protection Payments with Matilda. Review Email from union re penalties and fees. Frank Alvarado," and identifies a total billed time of 8.96 hours. Such entries preclude the Court from engaging in the required review of the reasonableness and necessity of the services provided.

Third, the Court notes that it does not appear Applicant has provided any detailed description or summary of the expenses incurred and requested through the application. Pursuant to Local Rule 2016-1(a)(1)(F) and applicable case law, a summary of the expenses incurred is required for allowance.

Given that the fee application is replete with instances of lumping which would result in a disallowance of a substantial amount, if not the majority of the requested fees, the Court is inclined to DISALLOW the application in its entirety, without prejudice, and allow Applicant to file an amended fee application.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
2:00 PM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11
AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
David Lozano
Movant(s):
AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano David Lozano
2:00 PM
6:18-10155

Jose De Jesus Hernandez

Chapter 11

#30.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 10/23/18 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose De Jesus Hernandez Represented By
Eric Bensamochan
2:00 PM
6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11

#31.00 Motion for Order Authorizing Assumption of Lease with Pacific Spectrum One Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 365(a)]

Also #32 EH
Docket 109
Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018
BACKGROUND
On July 12, 2018, LA Steel Servs., Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On Schedule G, Debtor listed an industrial lease agreement (the "Lease") with Pacific Spectrum One for business premises located at 1760 California Ave., Ste. 201, Corona, CA. On November 6, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to assume the Lease pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365. Debtor asserts that Debtor is not currently in default under the lease terms, that assumption of lease is a proper exercise of Debtor’s business judgment, and that the landlord is adequately assured of future payments pursuant to the lease terms.
DISCUSSION
11 U.S.C. § 365(a) provides that: "Except as provided in sections 765 and 766 of this title and in subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section, the trustee, subject to the court’s approval, may assume or reject any executory contract or unexpired lease of the debtor." 11 U.S.C. § 365(c) provides limitations which are not applicable to the
2:00 PM
CONT...
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation
Chapter 11
instant situation. 11 U.S.C. § 365(b) provides the requirements if there is an existing default in the executory contract to be assumed. Here, Debtor asserts that there is no default, and, therefore, that section is inapplicable.

11 U.S.C. § 365(d) provides for the deadline for an executory contract to be assumed or rejected. In a Chapter 11 case, 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(2) provides that executory contracts regarding personal property or residential real property may be assumed or rejected at any time prior to confirmation of the Chapter 11 plan. 11 U.S.C. § 365(d) (4)(A)(i) provides that an unexpired lease of nonresidential real property under which the debtor is the lessee shall be deemed rejected and surrendered if not assumed within 120 days after the petition date. Debtor’s case was filed on July 12, 2018, and, as a result, the deadline to assume the Lease was November 9, 2018. Nevertheless, ostensibly due to practical considerations, the majority of case law construes this deadline as a deadline for the filing of the motion rather than the entry of an order approving assumption. See e.g., 3 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 365.05[3][d] (16th ed. 2017) ("Recognizing these difficulties, most courts required that a trustee or debtor in possession act before the expiration of the [period], but held that court approval of a trustee or debtor in possession’s motion to assume could be granted after the expiration of the period.").

Therefore, none of the statutory exceptions being applicable, Debtor having demonstrated that the decision to assume is a sound exercise of its business judgment, notice being proper, and no opposition having been filed, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information
2:00 PM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11

#32.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18 Also #31
EH

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#33.00 CONT Application for Compensation for Michael Jones, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 3/27/2018 to 10/22/2018, Fee: $54,450, Expenses: $0.00

From: 11/13/18 EH
Docket 87

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

On March 27, 2018, G Hurtado Construction, Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The bankruptcy was precipitated by a wage and hour lawsuit brought by two and possibly more former employees. On April 25, 2018, the Court approved the employment application of M. Jones & Associates, P.C. ("Applicant") to serve as counsel to Debtor. Debtor’s initial disclosure statement required amendment following the Court’s allowance of late-filed claims. The First Amended DS and Plan were filed in October 2018. On October 22, 2018, the Applicant filed the instant and first interim fee application seeking allowance of
$54,450 in fees and $0 in expenses for the period of March 27, 2018, through and including October 22, 2018. No opposition has been filed.

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1), the court may award reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services. The court has an independent duty to review the fee application in the absence of objections. See 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(2). The court "will not indulge in extensive labor and guesswork to justify a fee for an attorney who has not done so himself." In re Taylor, 66 B.R. 390 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1986).

11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3) provides factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of requested compensation. These factors include time spent, rates charged, necessity of the service, reasonableness of the service, expertise of attorney, and comparable market rates.
2:00 PM
CONT...

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11
Applicant indicates that it is in possession of $10,600 being held in the firm’s trust account. Additionally, the Applicant indicates that the Debtor currently has
$722,251.50 in unrestricted funds with which to make payment. Here, based on the time entries narrative, and record of the case, the Court finds that the amounts sought by Applicant are reasonable. As an interim application, however, the Court will allow 80% of the requested fees, with 20% disallowed without prejudice as a hold back.

Moreover, pursuant to Local Rule 2016-1(a)(1)(J) requires a separately filed declaration from the client, or in the alternative, if the client refuses to provide such declaration, Applicant’s own declaration describing steps taken to obtain the client’s declaration. Here, the Application indicates that the client declaration would be filed in close proximity with the Application.

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request for allowance of fees at 80% ($43,560), and the related request for order authorizing payment by the Debtor, conditioned upon the filing of a client declaration or explanation, as required under LBR 2016-1(a)(1)(J)

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
2:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#34.00 Application to Employ Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP as General Bankruptcy Counsel

EH

Docket 45
Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018
DISCUSSION

"[I]t is clear that the bankruptcy court has broad discretion over the appointment of professionals." In re Seeburg Prods. Corp., 215 B.R. 175, 178 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1997). A violation of the rules of professional responsibility can be sufficient reason to disqualify a proposed counsel from being employed in a case. See, e.g.. In re Universal Bldg. Prods., 486 B.R. 650, 661 (Bankr. D. Del. 2010) (collecting cases).

"An attorney retained by the trustee, or debtor in possession, who assists with the collection of the assets of the estate, must abide by the highest professional standards." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 840 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991) "Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is the standard of behavior." Meinhard v. Salmon, 164 N.E. 545, 546 (N.Y. 1928).

"[A] debtor who proposes a sale of all of its assets . . . must fully disclose to the court and creditors the relationship between the buyer and seller, as well as the circumstances under which the negotiations have taken place, any marketing efforts, and the factual basis upon which the debtor determined that the price was reasonable." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. at 842. In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc.,
2:00 PM
CONT...

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11
continued on to state:

The Court finds from the evidence before it that Ms. Bernstein either (1) knew of the collusive and undisclosed relationships in this case and knowingly participated in misleading the Court and creditors; or (2) didn’t know of the collusive and undisclosed relationships in this case, and is therefore wholly incompetent because she insisted on remaining ignorant of the facts and law applicable to her case notwithstanding the numerous indicia of questionable conduct along the way. Whether Ms. Bernstein’s acts were wrongful, willfully incompetent or grossly negligent is not important to the determination here.
Under either case, the Court concludes her fees must be denied in their entirely [sic], she should not be permitted to represent debtors in possession before any bankruptcy court, and her conduct in this case must be referred to the State Bar of California for disciplinary proceedings.

Id. at 847.

In the instant case, it appears Applicant failed to act with honesty and candor in relation to the sale of substantially all of the estate’s assets. Specifically, notwithstanding Applicant’s duty to the Court, Applicant failed to disclose a material side deal which was pertinent to the terms of the sale under review, and Applicant even stated at the hearing it was not Applicant’s job to make such disclosure.
Applicant’s conduct in this case has fallen short of complying with the rules of professional conduct and has obstructed the Court’s review of the primary matter in this case, the sale of substantially all of Debtor’s assets. Given that such conduct is clearly adequate to disallow Applicant’s fees in their entirety, the Court is inclined to find that authorizing the employment of Applicant would be a frivolous exercise.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DISALLOW the application.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

#35.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement
(Holding Date)

From: 8/21/18, 10/23/18 Also #36
EH

Docket 78
Tentative Ruling:
8/21/18
1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
  
  On January 26, 2018, Markus Boyd ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On February 13, 2018, the Court entered an interim order approving use of cash collateral. On March 6, 2018, the Court entered orders (1) authorizing Debtor to provide adequate assurance of payment to utility service providers and; (2) approving a budget. On March 26, 2018, the Court authorized the employment of Nicholas Gebelt as counsel for Debtor. On April 26, 2018, the Court disallowed four claims of American Express (claim numbers 2 and 4-6).
  
  On June 22, 2018, Debtor filed its disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan. On August 7, 2018, UST filed a limited objection to Debtor’s disclosure statement.
2. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Markus Anthony Boyd
  
  Chapter 11
  
  In addition to the disclosure statement, the following exhibits are included: (1) "Treatment of Claims/Interests" (Exhibit A); (2) "Executory Contracts & Unexpired Leases" (Exhibit B); (3) "Cash Flow Projections" (Exhibit C); (4) "Recent Financial History" (Exhibit D); (5) "Secured Claims" (Exhibit E); (6) "General Unsecured Claims, in Class 4A or 4B" (Exhibit F); "Liquidating Analysis" (Exhibit G); "Endnotes/Continuation Sheets" (which includes a supplement) (Exhibit H). Debtor has used the Court’s optional disclosure statement form and worksheets, and, therefore, the format of the disclosure statement is adequate.
  
  The Chapter 11 Plan’s proposed effective date is October 21, 2018. There are four classes of claims and four listed categories of unclassified claims1:
  1. Class 1: Arrears secured by real property -- $174,971.67 claim, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months. Debtor’s Exhibit A contains a row for arrears on the second and third deeds of trust, but does not identify any amount owing.
  2. Class 2: Additional claims secured by real property – Debtor lists three different claims within this class. Debtor proposes to continue paying his mortgage (identified as $772,733.45)2, over 230 months and at 2% interest. Debtor proposes to cure his delinquency on HOA dues over 60 months. Debtor has included a row for, presumably, future HOA dues but no amount is listed. Nor is it clear that this class is truly unimpaired.
  3. Class 3: Priority claims: Debtor’s plan does not list any claims in class 3
  4. Class 4: General Unsecured – $45,151.20, Debtor proposes to pay over 60 months.
    1. Type 1: UST fees ($650) – paid in full on effective date
    2. Type 2: Taxes (IRS) – approximately $80k, paid over 51 months
    3. Type 3: Taxes (FTB) –$5,651.86, paid over 51 months
      2:00 PM
      CONT...
      
      Markus Anthony Boyd
    4. Type 4: Nicholas Gebelt’s fees ($30k)—paid in full on effective date
    5. Type 5: Accountant’s fees – none listed
3. LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. Adequate Information

Chapter 11

A Chapter 11 disclosure statement is required to contain "adequate information" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1125(b). Section 1125(f)(2) provides that: "the court may approve a disclosure statement submitted on standard forms approved by the court or adopted under section 2075 of title 28." The Central District of California has devised a disclosure statement template, Form 3017-1.CH11.DISCLSR.STMT, which Debtor generally adopted as to format.

As to the substance of a disclosure statement, 11 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1) defines "adequate information" as:

information of a kind, and in sufficient detail as far as is reasonably practicable in light of the nature and history of the debtor and the condition of the debtor’s books and records, including a discussion of the potential material Federal tax consequences of the plan to the debtor, any successor to the debtor, and a hypothetical investor typical of the holders of claims or interests in the case, that would enable such a hypothetical investor of the relevant class to make an informed judgment about the plan, but adequate information need not include such information about any other possible or proposed plan and in determining whether a disclosure statement provides adequate information, the court shall consider the complexity of the case, the benefit of additional information to creditors and other parties in interest, and the cost of providing additional information
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

The type of information required varies with the circumstances. See, e.g., In re Jeppson, 66 B.R. 269, 292 (Bankr. D. Utah 1986) (listing nineteen categories of information commonly required); see also In re Malek, 35 B.R. 443, 443-44 (Bankr.
E.D. Mich. 1983) (listing minimum requirements).

While Debtor has utilized Court approved forms and has clearly delineated the treatment of the varying claims, the disclosure statement simply lacks the information necessary to evaluate Debtor’s financial situation and determine the probability of the plan’s success. First of all, as noted by UST, Debtor’s practice appears to have been not to withhold taxes on earned income. Second of all, the limited financial information provided by Debtor indicates his income fluctuates drastically. The four months of "recent financial history" (Exhibit D) including in the disclosure statement note the following monthly receipts:

1) $4,559 (February) (the corresponding monthly operating report lists receipts of
$51.89)
2) $32,591 (March)
3) $15,541 (April)
4) $35,626 (May)

Additionally, a monthly operating report for June, filed after the disclosure statement, identifies receipts in the amount of $1,801.11. The limited financial history provided supports UST’s assertion that: "Debtor’s tax liabilities are a significant risk factor given that the monthly operating reports reflect that the Debtor averages between
$18-$19,000 in monthly net income – much less than the $30,000 reported in the Disclosure Statement’s cash flow projections." Indeed, using that $18-$19,000 figure, if one assumes that the receipts are before tax and that Debtor will ultimately be unsuccessful in the pending adversary proceeding, it would appear that the proposed plan may be infeasible. In any event, the financial information provided in the disclosure statement is grossly inadequate for an evaluation of the prospects of the
2:00 PM
CONT...

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11
proposed plan. The information simply does not allow for a reasonably accurate estimation of Debtor’s income and expenses moving forward.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
Movant(s):
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
2:00 PM
6:18-10628

Markus Anthony Boyd

Chapter 11

#36.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 3/20/18, 8/21/18, 10/23/18 Also #35
EH

Docket 16

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Markus Anthony Boyd Represented By Nicholas W Gebelt
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#37.00 Motion of the Debtor and Debtor-in-Possession for Order Approving Services Agreement with Force 10 Partners, LLC, Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(b)

Also #38 - #40

EH

Docket 154
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/15/19 at 2:00 PM
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall Ryan W Beall
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#38.00 Motion To Compel Payment Of Administrative Rent Or Immediate Rejection Of Lease And Related Relief

Also #37 - #40

EH

Docket 194

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
The H. N. and Frances C. Berger Represented By
David B Golubchik
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#39.00 Application for Compensation Notice of Hearing and First and Final Application for Approval of Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses for Todd L Turoci, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 8/16/2018 to 9/28/2018, Fee: $39,127.50, Expenses:
$2,670.02.

Also #37 - #40

EH

Docket 126

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall Ryan W Beall
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#40.00 Status Conference RE: [171] Ombudsman Report for the period of 09/13/2018 through 10/26/2018 (Cosman, Bradley)

Also #37 - #39

EH

Docket 171

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
11:00 AM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01308 Cisneros v. BWI CONSULTING, LLC et al

#1.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01308. Complaint by
A. Cisneros against BWI CONSULTING, LLC, Black and White, Inc., BLACK AND WHITE BILLING COMPANY, BLACK AND WHITE INK, MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 7/27/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17, 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 6/11/18, 8/22/18

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
BWI CONSULTING, LLC Pro Se
Black and White, Inc. Pro Se
BLACK AND WHITE BILLING Pro Se
BLACK AND WHITE INK Pro Se
MEHRAN DEVELOPMENT Pro Se
11:00 AM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
11:00 AM
6:17-18075

Steven Rodriguez and Jennifer Rodriguez

Chapter 7

#2.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 31
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING
11/28/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 292 Trustee Expenses: $ 29

The Trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Steven Rodriguez Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Jennifer Rodriguez Represented By Andrew Nguyen
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Steven Rodriguez and Jennifer Rodriguez

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-19329

Adrian James Walker and Sahtasah Evett Walker

Chapter 7

#3.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 25
Tentative Ruling:

11/28/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee Final Report been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 566.83 Trustee Expenses: $ 153.54

The Trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Trustee to lodge an order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Adrian James Walker Represented By Steven A Alpert
Joint Debtor(s):
Sahtasah Evett Walker Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
CONT...

Adrian James Walker and Sahtasah Evett Walker

Chapter 7
11:00 AM
6:18-11327

Latoya Joy Armstrong

Chapter 7

#4.00 CONT Order to show cause why John Alarcon should not be held in contempt of court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §105 and F.R.B.P. 9020
(Holding date)

From: 8/30/18, 9/27/18, 10/17/18 EH
Docket 20
*** VACATED *** REASON: STIPULATED ORDER ENTERED 11/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Latoya Joy Armstrong Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

#5.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Bankruptcy Case From: 10/17/18, 10/24/18
Also #6 EH
Docket 47
Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On April 13, 2018, Desert Ice Castle, LLC ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 7 relief. Steven Speier is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). The Debtor’s Managing Member and alleged sole owner is Anthony Liu ("Liu"). The petition indicated that the Debtor owned assets totaling $1,864.61 and had liabilities totaling $860,500. The Debtor listed two claimants in Schedule F, one claim of Andrzej Luczynski ("Luczynski") in the amount of $800,000 (as disputed) and a claim of Lui Bin in the amount of $60,500. On September 12, 2018, Luczynski filed Claim No 1-1 in the amount of $3,200,000 based on a State Court Action for "unlawful termination [of] joint venture; conversion; unlawful eviction". Luczynski has further indicated that a trial date for the State Court Action is set for November 2, 2018. The Docket reflects that a Motion to Disallow Claim No. 1 has been set for hearing on October 24, 2018.

On September 10, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy ("Motion"). A notice of Non-opposition was filed by Lui Bin on the same date.
Opposition to the Motion was filed by Luczynski and the Trustee on October 3, 2018 (the "Oppositions"). The Debtor filed an Omnibus Reply to the Oppositions on October 10, 2018 ("Reply").

DISCUSSION
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC
The Debtor seeks dismissal pursuant to § 305(a)(1). Section 305(a)(1)

Chapter 7
provides as follows:
The court, after notice and a hearing, may dismiss a case under this title, or may suspend all proceedings in a case under this title, at any time if—

(1) the interests of creditors and the debtor would be better served by such dismissal or suspension;
11 U.S.C. § 305(a)(1); In re Eastman, 188 B.R. 621, 625 (9th Cir. BAP 1995). The
courts that have construed § 305(a)(1) are in general agreement that abstention in a properly filed bankruptcy case is an extraordinary remedy, and that dismissal is appropriate under § 305(a)(1) only in the situation where the court finds that both "creditors and the debtor" would be "better served" by a dismissal. Id. (internal citations omitted). The legislative history uses the following example of such a situation:

an arrangement is being worked out by creditors and the debtor out of court, there is no prejudice to the rights of creditors in that arrangement, and an involuntary case has been commenced by a few recalcitrant creditors to provide a basis for future threats to extract full payment.
H.R.Rep. No. 95–595, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 325 (1977); 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963,
6281.
As the statutory language and legislative history demonstrate, the test under § 305(a) is not whether dismissal would give rise to a substantial prejudice to the debtor. Nor is the test whether a balancing process favors dismissal. Rather, the test is whether both the debtor and the creditors would be "better served" by a dismissal.

In support of the Motion, the Debtor argues that (1) Luczynski will suffer no prejudice from dismissal of the case because the amended complaint filed in the State Action dismissed the Debtor from the complaint; (2) Creditor Lui Bin will be paid in full; (3) the only parties benefitting from continuation of the case are the Trustee and his professionals. Although the Debtor has seemingly been dismissed from the underlying State Court litigation, the State Action retains allegations that the Debtor is an alter ego of the named defendant, Liu. (Roman Decl. ¶ 2).
The Oppositions essentially assert that (1) Luczynski has filed a proof of claim
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7
that constitutes prima facie evidence of a claim; and (2) avoidable insider payments have been discovered that will benefit the Debtor’s creditors.

On the current record, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. Here, assuming (as the Court must at this juncture) that Luczynski may have an enforceable claim against the Debtor’s estate, dismissal is likely to result in plain legal prejudice to Luczynski because the Debtor and its principal/sole shareholder seek to payoff the only other unsecured creditor in full in order to force a dismissal. The Debtor’s strategy is a transparent violation of the bankruptcy code’s command that similarly situated creditors must be treated similarly. Additionally, the Court is unconvinced that the dismissal of the Debtor from the underlying State Court Action is a sufficient basis to find that the Debtor has no remaining liability to Luczynski. In fact, the Debtor’s evidence confirms that Luczynski’s complaint continues to argue that the Debtor and Liu are alter egos. For now, the Court agrees with the Trustee and Luczynski that dismissal would be premature at this point.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Debtor has not met its burden of demonstrating that both the Debtor and creditors will be "better served" by dismissal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Movant(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
11:00 AM
CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7
11:00 AM
6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

#6.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims Disallowing Claim No. 1 of Andrzej Luczynski Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502

From: 10/24/18 Also #5
EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Movant(s):
Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
11:00 AM
6:18-15107

Jesus Davila Romero

Chapter 7

#7.00 Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 7 to 13 EH
Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jesus Davila Romero Represented By Neil R Hedtke
Movant(s):
Jesus Davila Romero Represented By Neil R Hedtke
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
11:00 AM
6:18-18094

Gregory O Ouma

Chapter 7

#8.00 Motion For Contempt And Violation Of The Automatic Stay EH
Docket 12
Tentative Ruling:
11/28/2018

BACKGROUND

On October 16, 2017, Gregory Ouma ("Debtor") filed a chapter 13 petition for relief (the "First Case"). The Debtor’s First Case was dismissed on November 30, 2017. On September 25, 2018 ("Petition Date"), filed his petition for chapter 7 relief (the "Second Case").

On November 2, 2018, the Debtor filed a Motion for Contempt ("Motion") asserting that H.D. Valley Development Corporation, H.G. Long and Leslie Born ("Respondents") violated the automatic stay by continuing legal proceedings to obtain a judgment and writ of possession on October 30, 2018. On November 13, 2018, Respondents filed their opposition to the Motion ("Opposition").

DISCUSSION

The Respondents respond that pursuant to § 362(c)(3), when a debtor had a single or joint case pending within the preceding 1-year period which was dismissed, the stay terminates on the 30th day after the filing of the later case unless a motion to extend the stay is granted. 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3). Here, the Debtor’s First Case was pending and dismissed within 1 year of the filing of the Second Case. Thus, § 362(c)
(3) applies. Pursuant to § 362(c)(3), the stay terminated on October 25, 2018. Per the Respondents’ declaration and evidence, the unlawful detainer trial was originally set for September 27, 2018, but was continued to October 30, 2018, due to the filing of the Second Case. The record before the Court indicates that there were no actions taken by Respondents during the 30-day period between the Petition Date and October 25, 2018. Additionally, the docket text attached to the Debtor’s motion indicates that the only action taken by Respondents during the 30-day stay period was the filing of a
11:00 AM
CONT...

Gregory O Ouma

Chapter 7
notice of continuance of the trial to October 30, 2018 on October 5, 2018.
Prohibited communications include those where direct or circumstantial evidence shows the creditor's actions were geared toward collection of a prepetition debt, were accompanied by coercion or harassment, or otherwise put pressure on the debtor to pay. In re Zotow, 432 B.R. 252, 258–59 (9th Cir. BAP 2010). Here, the filing of, and service of the notice of continuance are not in the nature of prohibited communications under § 362(a). Thus, the Debtor has failed to demonstrate that any action by Respondents violated the automatic stay.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gregory O Ouma Pro Se
Movant(s):
Gregory O Ouma Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18317

Chiu Ng

Chapter 7

#9.00 Motion For Order Compelling Attorney To File Disclosure Of Compensation Pursuant To 11 U.S.C. § 329 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 2016

EH

Docket 13
Tentative Ruling:

11/28/18
On October 17, 2018, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed its Motion for Order Compelling Attorney to File Disclosure of Compensation pursuant to 11
U.S.C. § 329 ("Motion"). The Motion requested that the Law Office of William Windham ("Windham") file a Statement of Attorney Compensation. Windham filed the Statement of Attorney Compensation on November 8, 2018.

The Court is inclined to DENY the Motion as moot.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chiu Ng Represented By
William E Windham
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
Abram Feuerstein esq
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:10-01319 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#10.00 Motion for Protective Order re Third Party Subpoena EH
Docket 471
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Defendant(s):
Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
2:00 PM
CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Larry Day Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
Neil M Miller Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
Paul Roman Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
Peter T. Healy Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
Movant(s):
KPMG LLP Represented By
Richard W Esterkin
Plaintiff(s):
RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Peter M Bransten
Michael I Gottfried Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau
Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01303 Cisneros v. AMERICAN EXPRESS

#11.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01303. Complaint by
A. Cisneros against AMERICAN EXPRESS. (Charge To Estate $350). For Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 1/13/16, 3/23/16, 5/25/16, 6/29/16, 8/31/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 5/3/17 9/13/17, 12/13/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 6/11/18, 8/22/18

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/27/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
AMERICAN EXPRESS Represented By Robert S Lampl Chad V Haes
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#12.00 Motion by Revere Financial Corporation and Receiver Jerry Wang to Strike Affirmative Defenses in Answer by Douglas J. Roger to First Amended Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation and Receiver Jerry Wang

EH

Docket 133
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw Thomas J Eastmond Marc C Forsythe
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Jerry Wang Represented By
Franklin R Fraley Jr Anthony J Napolitano
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
A. Cisneros Represented By
Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#13.00 Motion for Protective Order Interested Parties Douglas J. Roger And Nicole L. Ebarbs Notice Of Motion And Motion For Protective Order Pursuant To Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Rules 26(c) and 45

Also #14 EH
Docket 93
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Douglas J. Roger and Nicole L. Represented By Marc C Forsythe
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay Franklin R Fraley Jr

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#14.00 Motion to Quash Modify and/or for a Protective Order re Subpoenas served on Citizens Business Bank, MUFG Union Bank, and Bank of Southern California by Plaintiff

Also #13 EH
Docket 95
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Liberty Orthopedic Corporation Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
Universal Orthopaedic Group Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
OIC Medical Corporation Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Franklin R Fraley Jr

Chapter 7
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:18-12282

Frank Javier Valderrama

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01141 Balderas et al v. Valderrama

#15.00 Status Conference RE: [10] Amended Complaint First by John F Bazan on behalf of Elizabeth Balderas, Jose Carrillo against all plaintiffs. (Bazan, John)

EH

Docket 10
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 11/27/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Defendant(s):
Frank Javier Valderrama Represented By Robert G Uriarte
Plaintiff(s):
Elizabeth Balderas Represented By John F Bazan
Jose Carrillo Represented By
John F Bazan
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#16.00 CONT Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint Against Chapter 7 Trustee From: 9/4/18, 10/30/18
Also #17 EH
Docket 14
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 11/20/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Defendant(s):
Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Movant(s):
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Plaintiff(s):
Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
6:18-10939

Vance Zachary Johnson

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01105 Johnson v. Goe & Forsythe, LLP et al

#17.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01105. Complaint by Joana Johnson against Vance Zachary Johnson, Goe & Forsythe, LLP. (61 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(5), domestic support)) (Talkov, Scott)

From: 7/10/18, 9/12/18, 10/30/18 Also #16
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 11/20/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Vance Zachary Johnson Represented By Robert P Goe
Defendant(s):
Goe & Forsythe, LLP Pro Se
Todd A Frealy, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Monica Y Kim
Plaintiff(s):
Joana Johnson Represented By Scott Talkov
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Monica Y Kim
2:00 PM
6:17-19042

Trending Up

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01078 Simons (TR) v. Parks et al

#18.00 CONT Status Conference Re: Complaint by Larry D Simons (TR) against Robert Parks, Barbara Parks. (Charge To Estate) Nature of Suit: 12 - Recovery of money/property - 547 preference

From: 6/5/18, 8/22/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 11/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Trending Up Represented By
Daniel King
Defendant(s):
Robert Parks Represented By
Kathleen P March
Barbara Parks Represented By Kathleen P March
Plaintiff(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:15-14230

Home Security Stores, Inc.

Chapter 7

#19.00 Chapter 7 Trustee, John P. Pringle's Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Extending Time to File Avoidance Actions Under 11 U.S.C. § 546

EH

Docket 114

Tentative Ruling:
11/28/2018

On October 30, 2018, the Trustee filed a Motion for Order Extending Time to file Avoidance Actions under 11 USC § 546 and FRBP 9006. Service of the Motion was proper and no opposition has been filed. Good cause appearing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the request for a 6-month extension of time for Trustee to file avoidance actions.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Home Security Stores, Inc. Represented By Winfield S Payne III
Movant(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Charity J Manee
2:00 PM
6:16-15813

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01138 Speier v. Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC et al

#20.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01138. Complaint by Steven M Speier against Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC, Conestoga International Holdings, LLC, Conestoga Trust, Provident Trust Group, LLC, De Leon & Washburh, P.C., Thomas Washburn, Hector De Leon, Jeff Converse, Michael Woods, Michael McDermott. (Charge To Estate). Complaint for: (1) Breach of Written Contract; (2) Rescission and Restitution for Fraud; (3) Money Had and Received; (4) Unjust Enrichment; (5) Fraud; (6) Negligent Representation; (7) Negligence; (8) Rescission and Restitution for Sale of Unqualified Securities [Cal. Corp. §25503]; (9) Damages for Sale of Unqualified Securities [Cal. Corp. §25503]; (10) Rescission: Securities: Misrepresentation [Cal. Corp. §25501]; (11) Damages: Securities: Misrepresentation [Cal. Corp. § 25501]; (12) Contempt for Willful Violation of Automatic Stay Pursuant to 11
U.S.C. § 105; and (13) Elder Financial Abuse [Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15600 et seq.] Nature of Suit: (14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) (Eastmond, Thomas)

From: 8/29/18 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John E. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Defendant(s):
Conestoga Settlement Services, LLC Represented By
Charles Miller
2:00 PM
CONT...

John E. Tackett

Chapter 7
Conestoga International Holdings, Represented By
Charles Miller
Conestoga Trust Represented By Charles Miller
Provident Trust Group, LLC Represented By Marshall J Hogan
De Leon & Washburh, P.C. Represented By Jasmin Yang David D Samani
Thomas Washburn Represented By Jasmin Yang David D Samani
Hector De Leon Represented By Jasmin Yang David D Samani
Jeff Converse Pro Se
Michael Woods Pro Se
Michael McDermott Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Ellen O. Tackett Represented By Stefan R Pancer
Plaintiff(s):
Steven M Speier Represented By Thomas J Eastmond Robert P Goe
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:17-14345

Ruth Herrera Dresser

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:17-01186 Gordon v. Dresser

#21.00 CONT Status Conference on Complaint fld 8-25-17 for Non Dischargeability of Debt under False Pretense, False Representations and Fraud 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(A)(2); Non Dischargeability of Debt under Fraud and Defalcation While Acting in a Fiduciary Capacity 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(A)(4); Non Dischargeability of Debt for Wilfull and Malicious Injury 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(A)(6)

From: 3/29/18, 11/7/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: JUDGMENT ENTERED 11/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ruth Herrera Dresser Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Defendant(s):
Ruth Dresser Represented By
Michael Jay Berger
Plaintiff(s):
Marshall Gordon Represented By Marvin H Weiss
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01186 Roberto v. Tyler & Bursch, LLP et al

#1.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Donna Roberto's Complaint for Declaratory Relief # 2 Declaration of Nathan R. Klein in Support of Defendants Tyler & Bursch, LLP and Jennifer L. Bursch's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Donna Roberto's Complaint for Declaratory Relief # 3 Declaration of Jennfer L. Bursch in Support of Defendants Tyler & Bursch, LLP and Jennifer L. Bursch's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Donna Roberto's Complaint for Declaratory Relief # 4 Compendium of Exhibits in Support of Defendants Tyler & Bursch, LLP and Jennifer L. Bursch's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Donna Roberto's Complaint for Declaratory Relief # 5 Declaration of Service) (Tyler, Robert)

Also #2 EH
Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:
APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Tyler & Bursch, LLP Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
Jennifer Bursch Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
11:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13
Tyler & Bursch, LLP Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
Jennifer Bursch Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01186 Roberto v. Tyler & Bursch, LLP et al

#2.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01186 Complaint by Donna Roberto against Tyler & Bursch, LLP, Jennifer Bursch. (Fee Not Required).
Nature of Suit: (91 (Declaratory judgment)),(21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)

Also #1 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Tyler & Bursch, LLP Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
Jennifer Bursch Represented By Robert H Tyler Todd L Turoci
Plaintiff(s):
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
CONT...

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13
11:00 AM
6:18-17351

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13
Adv#: 6:18-01181 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC et al

#3.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01181. Complaint by Melanie Tarhuni against Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC , Loancare LLC . (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)) ,(71 (Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay)) ,(91 (Declaratory judgment))

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Loancare LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill
Plaintiff(s):
Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:14-12516

John Alexander Jay

Chapter 13

#4.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a RARA with attached Exhibits and Proof of Service for Summer M Shaw, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 6/25/2018 to 8/16/2018, Fee: $1087.50, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 220

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
John Alexander Jay Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
John Alexander Jay Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:14-17529

Troy Gene Thomas and Becky L Thomas

Chapter 13

#5.00 Application for Compensation of Attorney for Debtor for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case with Proof of Service for Jenny L Doling, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/30/2018 to 10/8/2018, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 120

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Troy Gene Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Joint Debtor(s):
Becky L Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Troy Gene Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Becky L Thomas Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-13599

Maurice Frank Manceau

Chapter 13

#6.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a RARA with Proof of Service for Jenny L Doling, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 8/30/2018 to 9/27/2018, Fee: $425.00, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 83

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Maurice Frank Manceau Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Maurice Frank Manceau Represented By Jenny L Doling Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:15-13218

Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz

Chapter 13

#7.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a RARA with attached Exhibit A and Proof of Service for Summer M Shaw, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/20/2017 to 1/5/2018, Fee: $265.00, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 118

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Movant(s):
Ramiro J Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling Jenny L Doling
Norma Idalia Cruz Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Ramiro J Cruz and Norma Idalia Cruz

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:16-11303

Joseph Robert Byrne and Hillary Allyne Byrne

Chapter 13

#8.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a RARA with attached Exhibit A and Proof of Service for Jenny L Doling, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 6/6/2018 to 7/5/2018, Fee: $265.00, Expenses: $0.

EH

Docket 121

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph Robert Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Joint Debtor(s):
Hillary Allyne Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
Joseph Robert Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw Summer M Shaw
Hillary Allyne Byrne Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Joseph Robert Byrne and Hillary Allyne Byrne

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:16-13595

Robert P Contreras and Marie G Contreras

Chapter 13

#9.00 Application for Compensation with proof of service for Sundee M Teeple, Debtor's Attorney, Fee: $797.50, Expenses: $53.58

EH

Docket 50

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Robert P Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Joint Debtor(s):
Marie G Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Movant(s):
Robert P Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple
Marie G Contreras Represented By Michael Smith Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Sundee M Teeple
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Robert P Contreras and Marie G Contreras

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13

#10.00 Application for Compensation Amended to Correct the Docket Number of the Opp to TMD on Page Three (3) of the Application with Proof of Service for Summer M Shaw, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 7/10/2018 to 9/11/2018, Fee:
$425.00, Expenses: $0. Also #11
EH

Docket 117

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Movant(s):
Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13

#11.00 Application for Compensation of Attorney for Debtor for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case with Proof of Service for Summer M Shaw, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 7/11/2018 to 10/5/2018, Fee:
$425.00, Expenses: $0. Also #10
EH

Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Joint Debtor(s):
Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Movant(s):
Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling
11:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:14-22637

Michelle Ann Maki

Chapter 13

#12.00 Motion to vacate dismissal EH
Docket 90

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Dana Travis
Movant(s):
Michelle Ann Maki Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-14972

Jude Okwor

Chapter 13

#13.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18 EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jude Okwor Represented By
Javier H Castillo
Movant(s):
Jude Okwor Represented By
Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-19696

Corinthia A. Williams

Chapter 13

#14.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property

MOVANT: CORINTHIA A. WILLIAMS

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
11/29/2018

The evidence that the tax issue which resulted in the dismissal of the Debtor’s second case is insufficient. At minimum, the Debtor should have provided a declaration of the tax preparer she hired to give the Court an opinion regarding the likelihood that the IRS would again file a claim of a similar amount, which would render the Debtor’s case infeasible.

As to service, the Order Setting Hearing on Shortened time required that a Written Notice of the Hearing AND a copy of the Court’s Order Setting the Hearing be sent to the creditors indicated. Instead, Docket No. 15 is a stand-alone proof of service which indicates that the Order and a Notice of Hearing were mailed to the foreclosing creditor. However, Docket reflects a failure by Debtor to file a Notice of Hearing indicating the date, time and place of the hearing. The stand-alone proof of service is insufficient for the Court to have certainty that a Notice of Hearing which satisfies due process requirements was mailed to the foreclosing creditor.
As such, the tentative ruling is to DENY the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
11:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Corinthia A. Williams

Chapter 13
Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13

#15.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Make Plan Payments to dismiss case and/or for order determining Milestone's debt is not subject to Debtor's plan or modification of plan

From: 10/25/18 Also #16
EH

Docket 59

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
Joint Debtor(s):
Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
Movant(s):
Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-11319

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13

#16.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 150 W. Highland Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405

MOVANT: MILESTONE FINANCIAL LLC From: 9/25/18, 10/18/18, 10/25/18
Also #15 EH
Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:
9/25/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

As a preliminary note, the Court notes that Local Rule 4001-(1)(c)(4) states that: "[a] motion for relief from the automatic stay must be filed separately from, and not combined in the same document with, any other request for relief, unless otherwise ordered by the court." Therefore, the default position is that the alternative requests made by Movant, for dismissal of the case or modification of the plan, are inappropriately brought in conjunction with a motion for relief from stay. Here, the Court is inclined to not deviate from the default position, because such requests are more appropriately heard on a Chapter 13 calendar when the Chapter 13 Trustee is present. Therefore, the Court is inclined to DENY the alternative requests for dismissal of the case or modification of the plan without prejudice.

Regarding the request for relief from the automatic stay, the Court notes that Debtor is correct in asserting that the Chapter 13 plan is a conduit plan, with payments to be made to Del Toro Loan Servicing, Movant’s servicer, through the plan. While the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Fernando Coronel and Maria Coronel

Chapter 13
Court notes that the docket does not reflect that a motion to dismiss for delinquency has been filed in this case, Debtor has not provided any supporting documentation indicating that the Chapter 13 plan payments are current.

Parties to discuss status of Chapter 13 plan payments and whether funds have been received by Movant and/or its loan servicer, Del Toro Loan Servicing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Fernando Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
Joint Debtor(s):
Maria Coronel Represented By Raymond Perez
Movant(s):
Milestone Financial, LLC Represented By Harris L Cohen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-12822

Cynthia Miller

Chapter 13

#17.00 Motion to Disallow Claims 1 & 2 re Cavalry SPV 1, LLC EH
Docket 32
Tentative Ruling:
11/29/2018

BACKGROUND:

On April 5, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Cynthia Miller ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 13 relief. On April 7, 2018, Cavalry SPV I, LLC ("Claimant") filed two claims against the Debtor’s estate: Claim No. 1 for $437.39 and Claim No. 2 for
$742.11. On October 25, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion objecting to both Claims 1 and 2 ("Objection"). Service was proper and no response has been filed.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the
11:00 AM
CONT...

Cynthia Miller

Chapter 13
claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

The Debtor asserts that Claims 1 and 2 are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Section 502(b)(1) provides that a claim is deemed allowed, unless such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor under applicable law. Under California law, the statute of limitations applicable to common counts is four years if the action is founded upon a contract or other writing (e.g., "book account" (¶ 3:398), "account stated" (¶ 3:400), or money lent on a note), and the statute of limitations is generally four years from the date of the last item in the account. CCP § 337(1),(2); Armstrong Petroleum Corp. v. Tri–Valley Oil & Gas Co., 116 CA 4th 1375, 1396, FN. 9 (Cal. App. 2004).

Here, both Claim No. 1 and Claim No. 2 present documentation indicating that the last transaction date or item on the accounts occurred more than four years prior to the Petition Date. Thus, based on the record before the Court, the Debtor has pointed to facts sufficient to defeat the allegations of the claim and Claimant has made no response.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection in its entirety
11:00 AM
CONT...

Cynthia Miller

Chapter 13
DISALLOWING Claims 1 and 2 in their entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cynthia Miller Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
Movant(s):
Cynthia Miller Represented By Richard Lynn Barrett
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-14257

Adam Casey Addison

Chapter 13

#18.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18, 9/13/18, 10/18/18 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Adam Casey Addison Represented By Nima S Vokshori Luke Jackson
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-14336

Peter Najim

Chapter 13

#19.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 7/19/18, 8/2/18, 8/23/18, 10/18/18 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Peter Najim Represented By
Ivan Trahan
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-15975

Rafael Martinez and Lilia Janeth Martinez

Chapter 13

#20.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rafael Martinez Represented By Omar Zambrano
Joint Debtor(s):
Lilia Janeth Martinez Represented By Omar Zambrano
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16458

Leonard Walter Frost, Jr. and Joan Cheng Frost

Chapter 13

#21.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Leonard Walter Frost Jr. Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Joint Debtor(s):
Joan Cheng Frost Represented By Kristin R Lamar
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16552

Patrick Lovato

Chapter 13

#22.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Patrick Lovato Represented By Justin Lynch
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16680

Tanisha S. Santee

Chapter 13

#23.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Tanisha S. Santee Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13

#24.00 CONT Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 1 by Claimant Tyler & Bursch, LLP.
HOLDING DATE

From: 11/8/18 Also #25
EH

Docket 31

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16811

Donna Roberto

Chapter 13

#25.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/25/18, 11/15/18
Also #24 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Roberto Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16892

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo

Chapter 13

#26.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 12 by Claimant SN Servicing Corporation

Also #27 EH
Docket 25
Tentative Ruling:
11/29/2018

BACKGROUND:

On August 15, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Shelley Gastelo ("Debtor") filed her petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the claims filed in the estate is Claim No. 12-1 filed by Elizon Master Participation Trust I, et al SN Servicing Corporation ("Claimant") in the amount of $257,339.12 on October 22, 2018. On October 25, 2018, the Debtor filed her Objection to Claim No. 12 ("Objection"). Claimant, in turn, filed a response to the Objection on November 13, 2018.

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby
11:00 AM
CONT...

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo

Chapter 13
giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.
Consol. Pioneer Mort. (In re Consol. Pioneer Mort.), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), aff’d, 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Allegheny Int’l, 954 F.2d at 173-74). The ultimate burden of persuasion remains at all times on the claimant.
Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

The Debtor requests that this Court disallow Claimant’s claim on the sole basis that she believes Claimant is noncompliant with FRBP 3001 in that Claimant has not indicated how arrears were calculated. However, as indicated by Claimant, in In re Campbell and In re Heath, the Ninth Circuit BAP indicated that lack of compliance with Rule 3001 is not a sufficient basis for disallowance of a claim. The Debtor has pointed to alternate sanctions provided for by Rule 3001 but has failed to establish that those sanctions are justified under the facts presented by this Objection.

TENTATIVE RULING
11:00 AM
CONT...

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo

Chapter 13
Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to OVERRULE the Objection in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo Represented By Marcella Lucente
Movant(s):
Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo Represented By Marcella Lucente Marcella Lucente
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-16892

Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo

Chapter 13

#27.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/25/18
Also #26 EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Shelley Elizabeth Gastelo Represented By Marcella Lucente
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17676

Patricia Ellen Bond-Gomez

Chapter 13

#28.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Patricia Ellen Bond-Gomez Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17700

Nick Caropino

Chapter 13

#29.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nick Caropino Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17735

Carlos Garcia

Chapter 13

#30.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carlos Garcia Represented By John F Brady
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-17946

Erika Lynn Pruitt

Chapter 13

#31.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Erika Lynn Pruitt Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18047

Leanne Diaz

Chapter 13

#32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Leanne Diaz Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18068

Isaias Solano

Chapter 13

#33.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/1/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Isaias Solano Represented By
Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18074

Rubin Esquivel

Chapter 13

#34.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rubin Esquivel Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18085

Gary Bryant

Chapter 13

#35.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gary Bryant Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18091

Elizabeth M. Laird

Chapter 13

#36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Elizabeth M. Laird Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18113

Michelle Delahanty

Chapter 13

#37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michelle Delahanty Represented By Patricia Rodriguez
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18119

Rebecca Anne Hernandez

Chapter 13

#38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rebecca Anne Hernandez Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18140

Janisha Michelle Cook

Chapter 7

#39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 10/11/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Janisha Michelle Cook Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18158

Jorge Leon and Alicia Leon

Chapter 13

#40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jorge Leon Represented By
Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Alicia Leon Represented By
Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18168

Nicholas Head

Chapter 13

#41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Nicholas Head Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18202

Marlene Gomez Tarula

Chapter 13

#42.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Marlene Gomez Tarula Represented By
James Geoffrey Beirne
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18206

Maria Virginia Rivas Mendez

Chapter 13

#43.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/16/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria Virginia Rivas Mendez Represented By Curtis R Aijala
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18309

Henry Lopez, Jr

Chapter 13

#44.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Henry Lopez Jr Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18326

Louise Laster

Chapter 13

#45.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Louise Laster Represented By
Neil R Hedtke
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18333

Chun Dae Felty

Chapter 13

#46.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/22/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chun Dae Felty Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18358

Grace Chacon Arranaga

Chapter 13

#47.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Grace Chacon Arranaga Represented By Robert L Firth
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18359

Gilbert Stanley Valencia

Chapter 13

#48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gilbert Stanley Valencia Represented By Neil R Hedtke
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18374

Mariama T Jobe

Chapter 13

#49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mariama T Jobe Represented By Gary S Saunders
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18402

Susan Louise Marquez

Chapter 13

#50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Susan Louise Marquez Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18413

Joseph A Hamburger and Kara L Hamburger

Chapter 13

#51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph A Hamburger Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Kara L Hamburger Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18415

Donna Denise Upton

Chapter 13

#52.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Donna Denise Upton Represented By Seema N Sood
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18451

Marcus Edward Kanavalov

Chapter 13

#53.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/23/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Marcus Edward Kanavalov Sr Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18457

Juan A Martinez

Chapter 13

#54.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Juan A Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18478

Jose Granados and Norma Granados-Maycott

Chapter 13

#55.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Granados Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Norma Granados-Maycott Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18484

Denise Awages Bracken

Chapter 13

#56.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Denise Awages Bracken Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18486

Jerome E. Geeter and Roslyn W Howell

Chapter 13

#57.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jerome E. Geeter Represented By Laleh Ensafi
Joint Debtor(s):
Roslyn W Howell Represented By Laleh Ensafi
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18492

Pablo Cornejo

Chapter 13

#58.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Pablo Cornejo Represented By Ivan Trahan
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18504

Elmer Arnold Tompkins

Chapter 13

#59.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Elmer Arnold Tompkins Represented By Scott Kosner
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18506

Chad Michael Kneip

Chapter 13

#60.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chad Michael Kneip Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18551

Robert Heck

Chapter 13

#61.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Robert Heck Represented By
John M Boyko
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18552

Alberto Josue Lopez

Chapter 13

#62.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Alberto Josue Lopez Represented By Anthony P Cara
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18553

Veronica Garcia

Chapter 13

#63.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Veronica Garcia Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18555

Virginia Benavides

Chapter 13

#64.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Virginia Benavides Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18557

Gema Beniukoff and Ruben Sotelo

Chapter 13

#65.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gema Beniukoff Represented By Amanda G Billyard
Joint Debtor(s):
Ruben Sotelo Represented By
Amanda G Billyard
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18559

Karen Ann Savel

Chapter 13

#66.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Karen Ann Savel Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18584

Jose Luis Garcia

Chapter 13

#67.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose Luis Garcia Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18614

Frank Thomas Scott

Chapter 13

#68.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Frank Thomas Scott Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18622

Jackie May Zapata

Chapter 13

#69.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jackie May Zapata Represented By Todd L Turoci
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-18651

Edward V. Cota and Estela D. Cota

Chapter 13

#70.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Edward V. Cota Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela D. Cota Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:18-10740

Karin Olaya

Chapter 13

#71.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH
Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Karin Olaya Represented By
Edward T Weber
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-18557

Michael Anthony Clay and Brenda Ann Clay

Chapter 13

#72.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 9/13/18, 11/8/18
EH

Docket 275

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Michael Anthony Clay Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Brenda Ann Clay Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:13-26237

Carlos Vincent Valdez and Grace G. Valdez

Chapter 13

#73.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 8/23/18, 10/18/18
EH

Docket 69

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carlos Vincent Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
Joint Debtor(s):
Grace G. Valdez Represented By Gregory M Shanfeld
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-22362

James Lange and Michelle Lange

Chapter 13

#74.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case (Delinquency) EH
Docket 160
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 10/24/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Lange Represented By
Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
Joint Debtor(s):
Michelle Lange Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple Craig K Streed
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:14-23388

Jose N Recinos and Patricia Recinos

Chapter 13

#75.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 304

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose N Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Joint Debtor(s):
Patricia Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-12404

Anthony E Turkson

Chapter 13

#76.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18
EH

Docket 142

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Anthony E Turkson Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-19069

Zulu A Ali

Chapter 13

#77.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 130

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Zulu A Ali Represented By
Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-19148

Esmeralda Caldera

Chapter 13

#78.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 80

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Esmeralda Caldera Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:15-20387

Marion Schmidt

Chapter 13

#79.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/8/18
EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Marion Schmidt Represented By Daniel C Sever
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-15304

Fabiola Puttre

Chapter 13

#80.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Fabiola Puttre Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-16240

Dorothy Mae Simmons

Chapter 13

#81.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Dorothy Mae Simmons Represented By
M Wayne Tucker
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-16909

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Chapter 13

#82.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 230

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-17902

Patricia Daniels

Chapter 13

#83.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 65

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Patricia Daniels Represented By Benjamin R Heston
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-18082

Joseph John Vargas and Lydia Vargas

Chapter 13

#84.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/8/18
EH

Docket 85

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Joseph John Vargas Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Lydia Vargas Represented By
Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-18372

Gene Ashley Heisser, Jr.

Chapter 13

#85.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 100

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Gene Ashley Heisser Jr. Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-19656

Jerome D Williams

Chapter 13

#86.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 79

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jerome D Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:16-20081

Richard LaFayatte Sellers

Chapter 13

#87.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/8/18
EH

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard LaFayatte Sellers Represented By Marjorie M Johnson
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10082

Francisco R Palacios

Chapter 13

#88.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 176

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Francisco R Palacios Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10101

Rizal Ligayo

Chapter 13

#89.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rizal Ligayo Represented By
Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-10667

Louis Gutierrez

Chapter 13

#90.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 58

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Louis Gutierrez Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-11245

Bryan D. Chriss

Chapter 13

#91.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Bryan D. Chriss Represented By Michael Smith Cynthia L Gibson Sundee M Teeple
Movant(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-14789

Sadia Sohail

Chapter 13

#92.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 11/8/18
EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Sadia Sohail Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-15604

Mandy Catron

Chapter 13

#93.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 8/30/18, 9/13/18, 10/18/18
EH

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mandy Catron Represented By Stephen S Smyth William J Smyth
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-17085

Paulette M Gonzales

Chapter 13

#94.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Paulette M Gonzales Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-18232

Maria Leticia Estrada

Chapter 13

#95.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 29
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/28/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Maria Leticia Estrada Represented By Raymond Perez
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-18272

Brenda Barlow

Chapter 13

#96.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Brenda Barlow Represented By Lionel E Giron
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-18507

Johnny Alcala

Chapter 13

#97.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Johnny Alcala Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20240

Natona Smith and Tameiko Smith

Chapter 13

#98.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 11/8/18
EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Natona Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Joint Debtor(s):
Tameiko Smith Represented By Natalie A Alvarado
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20272

Jesus E. Montano and Nichole Montano

Chapter 13

#99.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jesus E. Montano Represented By Paul Y Lee
Joint Debtor(s):
Nichole Montano Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:17-20652

Marian Amelia Pagano

Chapter 13

#100.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 9/13/18, 10/25/18
EH

Docket 29
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/27/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Marian Amelia Pagano Represented By David Lozano
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11701

Wayne Anthony King and Traci Ann Zweck

Chapter 13

#101.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 43

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Wayne Anthony King Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Traci Ann Zweck Represented By Dana Travis
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-11987

Carmen Lopez

Chapter 13

#102.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Carmen Lopez Represented By Paul Y Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-12782

Justa Nelida Guzman

Chapter 13

#103.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH
Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Justa Nelida Guzman Represented By Lionel E Giron
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-13714

Jose Martinez and Aurora Martinez

Chapter 13

#104.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jose Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Joint Debtor(s):
Aurora Martinez Represented By Rebecca Tomilowitz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-14340

Lawrence A McCoy

Chapter 13

#105.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/15/18
EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Lawrence A McCoy Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
11:01 AM
6:18-14770

Lamar Ramon Benjamin

Chapter 13

#106.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency EH
Docket 29

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Lamar Ramon Benjamin Represented By
Ethan Kiwhan Chin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Monday, December 3, 2018
Hearing Room
303

1:00 PM
6:18-19611

Pearl Bluitt

Chapter 13

#1.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1217-1219 W. 60th Place, Los Angeles, CA 90044

MOVANT: GREEN ROCK II, A WYOMING LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

EH

Docket 10
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Pearl Bluitt Represented By
Kenneth D Sisco
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-15119
Rodolfo Domingo Plado and Esmenia Rivera Plado
Chapter 13

#1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 4356 Camino San Miguel

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

EH

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: Yes
The parties are to update the Court regarding any discussions regarding an APO. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rodolfo Domingo Plado Represented By Dana Travis
Joint Debtor(s):
Esmenia Rivera Plado Represented By Dana Travis
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A./Wells Fargo Represented By
Rosemary Allen Michelle Jones Nancy L Lee
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Rodolfo Domingo Plado and Esmenia Rivera Plado

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:16-21150

Carl Darvin Gempeler and Charmaine Nina Gempeler

Chapter 13

#2.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 42190 Faber Ct, Temecula CA 92592

MOVANT: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

EH

Docket 31
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 11/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carl Darvin Gempeler Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Joint Debtor(s):
Charmaine Nina Gempeler Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Movant(s):
Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC Represented By
Erin M McCartney Mark S Krause
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-16409

Jesse Norman Dofelmire and Roucelle Frias Dofelmire

Chapter 13

#3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: (2016 Jeep Wrangler Vin # 1C4BJWEG9GL244205)

MOVANT: ALLY BANK

EH

Docket 62

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jesse Norman Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford
Joint Debtor(s):
Roucelle Frias Dofelmire Represented By Carey C Pickford
Movant(s):
Ally Bank Represented By
Adam N Barasch
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Jesse Norman Dofelmire and Roucelle Frias Dofelmire

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-11529

Michael A Losoya and Patricia O Losoya

Chapter 13

#4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 6713 Pierce Ct., Chino, CA 91710

MOVANT: HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 41
*** VACATED *** REASON: STIPULATED APO ENTERED 11/26/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael A Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Patricia O Losoya Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
HSBC Bank USA, National Represented By Darren J Devlin
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-14761

Reginald D. Caldwell

Chapter 13

#5.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 34524 Devlin Dr, Beaumont, CA 92223

MOVANT: MIDFIRST BANK

EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Reginald D. Caldwell Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Movant(s):
MidFirst Bank Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-16559

Charles Lynn Jenkins and Amanda Christina Marie Jenkins

Chapter 7

#6.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 35438 Stockton Street, Beaumont, CA 92223

MOVANT: DITECH FINANCIAL LLC

EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:
12/04/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1) and DENIED under § 362(d)(2) based on the existence of some equity in the Property. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT requests under ¶¶3 and 12.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Charles Lynn Jenkins Represented By Alexander Pham
Joint Debtor(s):
Amanda Christina Marie Jenkins Represented By
Alexander Pham
Movant(s):
Ditech Financial LLC Represented By Darlene C Vigil
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Charles Lynn Jenkins and Amanda Christina Marie Jenkins

Chapter 7
Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17681

Cameron Hudson

Chapter 13

#7.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Toyota Prius

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 25

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). DENY pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cameron Hudson Represented By Stuart R Simone
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17817

Ruben Alfonso Rios

Chapter 7

#8.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ford Fusion, VIN# 3FA6P0LU8GR281856

MOVANT: CAB WEST, LLC

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ruben Alfonso Rios Represented By Neil R Hedtke
Movant(s):
Cab West, LLC Represented By Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18140

Janisha Michelle Cook

Chapter 7

#9.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2018 Toyota Avalon

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 20

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Janisha Michelle Cook Pro Se
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18286

Allen Keith Taylor, Sr.

Chapter 7

#10.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Ford Fusion, VIN# 3FA6P0LU5HR306312

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
12/04/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Allen Keith Taylor Sr. Represented By Edward G Topolski
Movant(s):
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18651

Edward V. Cota and Estela D. Cota

Chapter 13

#11.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLA250W4, VIN: WDCTG4GB7HJ327390

MOVANT: DAIMLER TRUST

EH

Docket 17
*** VACATED *** REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Edward V. Cota Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Estela D. Cota Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Movant(s):
Daimler Trust Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18885

Terry E Crossley and Janell Crossley

Chapter 13

#12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: Nonresidential Lease at 1520 N. Mountain Ave., Building C, Suite 117, Ontario, California 91762 , Supporting Exhibits "1" through "3"

MOVANT: REAL ESTATE BABY 12 LLC

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: Yes

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). Parties to indicate whether resolution has been reached at hearing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Terry E Crossley Represented By Christopher J Langley
Joint Debtor(s):
Janell Crossley Represented By Christopher J Langley
Movant(s):
Real Estate Baby 12 LLC Represented By
W. Derek May
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Terry E Crossley and Janell Crossley

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18895

April Behrendt

Chapter 7

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Toyota Prius

MOVANT: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
12/4/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
April Behrendt Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi
Movant(s):
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#14.00 CONT Motion to Approve Stipulation By and Between Commercial Credit Group, Inc. and Debtor for Allowance of Administrative Rent Claim for $94,978.00

From: 10/30/18 Also #15
EH

Docket 416

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Commercial Credit Group, Inc. Represented By Andrew K Alper Michael J Gomez
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#15.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18, 7/10/18, 7/24/18, 8/14/18, 10/30/18

Also #14 EH
Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
2:00 PM
6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

#16.00 Confirmation of Chapter 11 Plan

Also #17 EH
Docket 52

Tentative Ruling:
1. BACKGROUND
  On August 25, 2017, Rick’s Patio, Inc. ("Debtor") filed its petition for chapter 11 relief. The Debtor is a California corporation, engaged in the business of selling new and used hot tubs (spas) and related supplies. The Debtor has designated itself as a small business under 11 U.S.C. § 101(51C). The hearing on confirmation is set for December 4, 2018. In connection with Debtor’s chapter 11 plan of reorganization ("Plan"), the Debtor obtained an order to value its assets. On October 5, 2018, the Debtor filed its valuation motion seeking to value the Debtor’s assets at $701,705.48 as of the petition date. The proposed valuation enables the Debtor to treat Wells Fargo and First Home Bank as the holders of secured claims and to avoid the junior liens of Fast Advanced Funding, LLC, Complete Business Solutions, Inc., Broadway Advance, LLC, Par Funding, Yellowstone Capital West LLC, and Cap Call LLC (collectively, the "Junior Liens").
2. DISCUSSION
  The debtor carries the burden of proving that a Chapter 11 plan complies with the statutory requirements for confirmation under §§ 1129(a) & (b). In re Arnold and Baker Farms, 177 B.R. 648 (9th Cir. BAP (Ariz.) 1994). The debtor must show that the plan is confirmable by a preponderance of the evidence. See id. at 654; see also In re Monarch Beach Venture, Ltd.,166 B.R. 428 (C.D.Cal.1993).
  1. Ballot Results:
    The Debtors timely transmitted the Plan and Disclosure Statement to all known Persons who hold Claims and Interests that are impaired under the Plan and who are therefore entitled to vote on the Plan. The Debtors received (4) four ballots. The votes
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Rick's Patio Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    were tallied as follows:
    1. Class 1: Wells Fargo (unimpaired)  Deemed to accept
    2. Class 2 First Home Bank (unimpaired) Deemed to accept
    3. Class 3 General Unsecured Claims (impaired)
      1. 1 ballot in favor, 100% of voting claims accepted. Thus, Class 3 has voted in favor
    4. Class 4: Insider Claims (impaired)
      1. 1 ballot in favor, 100% of voting claims accepted. Thus, Class 4 has voted in favor
    5. Class 5 Equity: not voting.
      
      A court can confirm a plan without resort to cram down if all impaired classes accept the plan. Here, all impaired classes have accepted the plan. Thus, cramdown is not required.
  2. Confirmation Requirements under 11 U.S.C. §1129(a)
  The Plan addresses the requirements of Bankruptcy Code 1129(a) as follows:
  1. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(1): The Plan complies with all of the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, including sections 1122 and 1123.
  2. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(2): The Debtor has complied with all of the Bankruptcy Code's applicable provisions.
  3. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(3): Good faith in proposing a plan of reorganization is assessed by the bankruptcy judge and viewed under the totality of the circumstances. In re Jorgensen, 66 B.R. 104, 108-109 (9th Cir. BAP 1986). Good faith requires that a plan will achieve a result consistent with the objectives and purposes of the Code. Jorgensen, 66 B.R. at 109. It also requires a fundamental fairness in dealing with one's creditors. Id. The bankruptcy judge is in the best position to assess the good faith of the parties. Id. Here, having received no objections to confirmation, the Court finds that the Plan has been proposed in good faith pursuant to FRBP 3020(b)(2).
  4. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(4): Debtor asserts that his Counsel will file a Fee Application shortly following confirmation of the Plan. This satisfies the Bankruptcy Code's requirement that payments for services or for costs and expenses in or in connection
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Rick's Patio Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    with a case, or in connection with a plan and incident to a case, must be approved by, or subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable.
  5. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(5): The Plan addresses the continued management of the Debtor by its principals. The management was fully disclosed and there has been no objection to the continuing management by the principals. The Court finds the Plan meets the requirements of this provision.
  6. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(6): does not apply to the instant case.
  7. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(7): Each Person who holds a Claim or Interest in a Class that is impaired under the Plan either: (a) has accepted the Plan; or (b) will receive or retain under the Plan property of a value, as of the Effective Date, that is not less than that Person would receive or retain if the Debtor were liquidated under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtor has demonstrated that all impaired interest holders have accepted the plan.
  8. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(8): Section 1129(a)(8) requires unanimity of all classes to consensually confirm a plan. That is, each impaired class must have affirmatively accepted the plan. The Ballot Tally above indicates that this requirement is satisfied because all impaired classes have affirmatively accepted the plan.
  9. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(9): Section 1129(a)(9)(A) requires that holders of administrative claims and gap claims be paid "cash equal to the allowed amount of such claim" on the "effective date of the plan," unless the holder of a particular claim agrees to different treatment. Here, the Plan provides for the payment of outstanding administrative fees upon approval of fees and on the effective date. The priority tax claimants will be paid in full with interest within 5 years of the Petition Date and no distributions will be made to equity holders until all Plan payments are paid in full. This requirement is satisfied.
  10. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(10): This provision requires at least one class of claims that is impaired accept the plan. This requirement is satisfied.
  11. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(11): Plan confirmation is not likely to be followed by either the liquidation or the further financial reorganization of the Reorganized Debtor or
    2:00 PM
    CONT...
    
    Rick's Patio Inc
    
    Chapter 11
    any successor to the Reorganized Debtor. The Debtor’s projections and the MORs in the Court’s record reflect that the projections of the Debtor appear accurate.
    Additionally, the Debtor’s CFO has asserted that the Debtor will benefit from accumulated Net Operating Losses that will enable it to lower its tax liability for the coming years. The evidence provided, in addition to the Debtor’s anecdotal evidence that the market for hot tubs is generally improving, suffices for purposes of confirmation today, particularly where the Debtor’s creditors have accepted the Plan. As such, the Court finds this requirement is satisfied.
  12. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(12): The treatment of Administrative Claims under the Plan is for the UST to be paid by the Effective Date. This requirement is satisfied.
  13. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(13): does not apply to the instant case.
  14. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(14): does not apply to the instant case.
  15. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(15): does not apply to the instant case.
  16. 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(16): This provision is satisfied for the reasons set forth in the Confirmation Brief.
3. TENTATIVE RULING
As set forth above, the Plan complies with the requirements of Section 1129, except that LBR 3018-1(a) requires the Debtor to make available the original ballots for inspection and review by the court. The original ballots were not attached to the ballot summary. Thus, in order to verify that the ballots were timely filed and signed, the Court is inclined to CONFIRM the Plan conditioned on provision of the ballots for the Court’s review, which Debtor may file prior to the hearing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein
2:00 PM
6:18-11806

Rick's Patio Inc

Chapter 11

#17.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 4/24/18, 7/31/18, 9/25/18 Also #16
EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Rick's Patio Inc Represented By
Robert B Rosenstein
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#18.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case From: 9/25/18, 10/1/18
Also #19 & #20 EH
Docket 37
Tentative Ruling:
9/25/2018
BACKGROUND

On July 23, 2018, Richard Garavito ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. Debtor previously filed a Chapter 13 case on April 17, 2018, which was dismissed on July 19, 2018.

On August 29, 2018, the Taylor Family Trust of June 16, 2004 ("Creditor"), the primary creditor in the instant case, filed a motion to confirm that the automatic stay terminated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A). On September 7, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to continue/impose the automatic stay. Because Debtor has not offered a cognizable legal argument as to why the automatic stay has not terminated, or why Debtor can obtain a continuation of the automatic stay after the statutory deadline, the Court has posted tentative rulings indicating that it intends to grant Creditor’s motion and deny Debtor’s motion.

On September 11, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the case and an application
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11
shortening time. On September 13, 2018, the Court approved the application shortening time, and set a hearing for September 25, 2018.

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(1) states:

Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party in interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4) provides a non-exclusive list of sixteen examples of cause – most of which are more appropriately considered when the moving party is an entity other than the debtor.

Here, Debtor’s motion is unclear, at best. The entire argument why the case should be dismissed is reproduced, verbatim, as follows:

In the present case, since the motion to impose and/or continue the stay was not timely filed, the stay will no longer be in effect with the pending motion to terminate the stay filed by secured creditor Taylor Family Trust.

The Debtor should not be penalized due to counsel’s inadvertent calendaring
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11
error of the 30 days rule of filing a motion to impose and/or continue the stay. However, an argument can be made that under the majority approach a motion to impose or continue the stay shall be filed as to the Debtor individually and not as to the property of the estate. Here, the Subject Property is property of the estate and the automatic stay should be in effect as to the Subject Property.

However, due to circumstances surrounding the possible termination of the stay, the Debtor requests dismissal of this case as there is no purpose if the stay is not in effect as to the Subject Property.

[Dkt. No. 37, pg. 5]. In summary, Debtor acknowledges that the stay has statutorily terminated and the deadline to continue the automatic stay has lapsed, but then argues that such stay termination is with regards to the Debtor only, not property of the estate. Despite the argument, the Debtor then asserts that due to "circumstances" the Debtor requests dismissal because there is "no purpose" if the stay has also terminated as to property of the estate.

There are multiple issues with the above line of argument. First, Debtor does not appear to have raised any coherent cause for dismissal – the only argument made in favor of dismissal, that the "Subject Property" is not protected by the automatic stay, (and thus this Chapter 11 case cannot be successful) is also explicitly rejected by Debtor. Second, § 1112(b) requires the Court to consider whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 is in the best interests of creditors and the estate. Here, Debtor’s schedules filed in the instant case indicate that all creditors would likely be paid in full if this case was converted to Chapter 7. Therefore, pursuant to the analysis required by § 1112(b), it is unclear why this case would be dismissed rather than converted to Chapter 7.

Finally, the Court acknowledges that, in a reply relating to its motion to confirm that the automatic stay has terminated, Creditor has requested that, if the case is dismissed, Debtor be restricted from re-filing by a bar. While raising this argument in a reply relating to a different motion is procedurally improper, the Court need not address the request at the current time given the issues above.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

TENTATIVE RULING

Debtor and Creditor to argue: (1) whether there is cause for dismissal; (2) whether the automatic stay is in effect as to the Subject Property; and (3) whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 would be in the best interests of creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
Movant(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#19.00 Amended Motion (related document(s): 30 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 5065 Brooks Street, Montclair, Ca 91763 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay

Also #18 & #20 EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
Movant(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#20.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/21/18, 10/16/18 Also #18 & #19
EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#21.00 Motion by United States Trustee to Dismiss and/or Convert Chapter 11 Case EH
Docket 189
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/16/18
Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Abram Feuerstein esq
2:00 PM
6:18-17533

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11

#22.00 Motion By United States Trustee To Dismiss And/Or Convert Chapter 11 Case Also #23
EH

Docket 34
Tentative Ruling:
12/04/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 5, 2018 ("Petition Date"), Antoine Babai ("Debtor") filed his petition for chapter 11 relief. The Debtor’s schedules reflect that he owns valuable real and personal property, including but not limited to a single family home located at 71100 Aeirie Road in Palm Desert, CA which may yield equity to pay creditors. On October 31, 2018, the Office of the United States Trustee ("UST") filed its Motion to Dismiss or Convert the Debtor’s case ("Motion"). Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

The basis for the Motion is the assertion of the UST that the Debtor has failed to comply with his chapter 11 duties. Specifically, the Debtor submitted only a partial 7-day package, the Debtor failed to provide financial statements, failed to provide a declaration confirming that all pre-petition bank accounts have been closed, and a copy of a voided check from the debtor-in-possession bank account. Additionally, the Debtor has failed to submit additional information requested by the UST at the September 27, 2018, debtor interview.

DISCUSSION
2:00 PM
CONT...

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11
Section 1112(b)(1) provides:

Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party in interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.

Section 1112(b)(4) sets forth a nonexhaustive list of what constitutes "cause" to convert or dismiss a case under § 1112(b)(1). In re Consol. Pioneer Mortg. Entities, 248 B.R. 368, 375 (9th Cir. BAP 2000), aff'd, 264 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2001). "The
movant bears the burden of establishing by preponderance of the evidence that cause exists." Sullivan v. Harnisch (In re Sullivan), 522 B.R. 604, 614 (9th Cir. BAP 2014) (citing StellarOne Bank v. Lakewatch, LLC (In re Park), 436 B.R. 811, 815 (Bankr.W.D.Va.2010)).

If the bankruptcy court finds that cause exists to grant relief under § 1112(b) (1), it must then: "(1) decide whether dismissal, conversion, or the appointment of a trustee or examiner is in the best interest of creditors and the estate; and (2) identify whether there are unusual circumstances that establish that dismissal or conversion is not in the best interest of creditors and the estate." In re Sullivan, 522 B.R. at 612 (citing § 1112(b)(1), (b)(2), and Shulkin Hutton, Inc., P.S. v. Treiger (In re Owens), 552 F.3d 958, 961 (9th Cir.2009)). In choosing between dismissal or conversion, a bankruptcy court must consider the interests of all creditors. Id. (citing In re Owens, 552 F.3d at 961). "If cause is established, the decision whether to convert or dismiss the case falls within the sound discretion of the court." Id. (citing Mitan v. Duval (In re Mitan), 573 F.3d 237, 247 (6th Cir .2009) and Nelson v. Meyer (In re Nelson), 343 B.R. 671, 675 (9th Cir. BAP2006)).

The basis for the Motion is the assertion of the UST that the Debtor has failed to comply with his chapter 11 duties. Specifically, the Debtor submitted only a partial
2:00 PM
CONT...

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11
7-day package, the Debtor failed to provide financial statements, failed to provide a declaration confirming that all pre-petition bank accounts have been closed, and a copy of a voided check from the debtor-in-possession bank account. Additionally, the Debtor has failed to submit additional information requested by the UST at the September 27, 2018, debtor interview. The UST’s Motion is amply supported by the attached declaration and evidence and the Court has expressed concerns with the Debtor’s case in the multiple case management conferences and hearings, on the record. Finally, the Court notes that the Debtor has failed to oppose the Motion and deems its nonopposition as consent to the granting of the relief requested pursuant to LBR 9013-1(h).

For the above reasons, the Court finds that cause is established to dismiss or convert the case. As to the choice between dismissal or conversion, the UST has pointed out and the Debtor’s schedules confirm that the Debtor likely has nonexempt assets that may be liquidated for the benefit of creditors. For these reasons, the Court finds that conversion is the appropriate remedy.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion and CONVERT the Debtor’s case to a case under chapter 7.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt
Movant(s):
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By
2:00 PM
CONT...

Antoine Hossein Babai

Everett L Green Abram Feuerstein esq

Chapter 11
2:00 PM
6:18-17533

Antoine Hossein Babai

Chapter 11

#23.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 10/2/18, 10/30/18 Also #22
EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Antoine Hossein Babai Represented By Christopher Hewitt
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#24.00 CONT Application for Compensation and Notice of Hearing with Proof of Service for Todd L Turoci, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/2/2017 to 9/17/2018, Fee:
$164280.00, Expenses: $7207.77. (Turoci, Todd)

PUT AT END OF CALENDAR

From: 10/16/18, 10/30/18 Also #14 & #15
EH

Docket 414

Tentative Ruling:
12/04/2018

Given the current stage of the chapter 11 proceeding, and finding that action by the Debtor to conclude the case remains outstanding, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the instant fee application for a short time period to permit the Debtor an opporutnity to file its request for dismissal and/or to otherwise outline a plan for concluding the case.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
3:00 PM
6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11

#25.00 Motion for Protective Order of Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 Examination and Production of Documents

EH

Docket 119

Tentative Ruling:
NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

11:00 AM

6:10-11814

Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco

Chapter 7 #1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 41

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Scott Leon Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Karen Lee Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Justin Witkin

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #2.00 CONT Motion To Reconsider Order Allowing Debtors To File Amended Schedules

From: 10/24/18 Also #3

Docket 45

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #3.00 CONT Motion Objecting To Debtors Claims Of Exemption In Proceeds From Personal Injury Case Pursuant To CCP § 704.140(b)

From: 10/24/18 Also #2

Docket 46

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

11:00 AM

6:14-16813

M. A. Tabor

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01128 Frealy v. Trotochau et al

#4.00 Application and Order for Appearance and Examination EH

Docket 53

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

M. A. Tabor Represented By

Judith Runyon

Defendant(s):

Robin Sherrie Trotochau Pro Se

Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc. Represented By

Leib M Lerner

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Plaintiff(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

11:00 AM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7 #5.00 Motion of Chapter 7 Trustee to Approve Compromise of Controversy EH

Docket 60

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/11/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

11:00 AM

6:18-10074

Charlie W Parker

Chapter 7 #6.00 Motion (1) For Sale of Real Property, Subject To Overbid; (2) Authorizing Sale Free And Clear Of Liens And Interests; (3) Authorizing Release Of Funds From Escrow; And (4) Approving Payment Of Real Estate Commissions

Docket 53

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/12/18 AT 11:00 A.M.

Party Information

Charlie W Parker Represented By David J Workman

Movant(s):

Party Information

Timothy John Hill Represented By Marc E Grossman

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:09-01235 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#10.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

David Loughnot Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K. DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried

Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur

Trustee(s):

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:10-01319 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#11.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

01/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

James P Previti Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Chapter 7

Larry Day Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Neil M Miller Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Paul Roman Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett

Peter T. Healy Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Peter M Bransten

Michael I Gottfried Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur

Trustee(s):

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:10-01329 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#12.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint

(Defendant - Empire Partners, Inc) HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,

1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,

12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,

10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,

11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried

------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl

Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett

Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Defendant(s):

Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Chapter 7

Previti Realty Fund, L.P. Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

The James Previti Family Trust Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Plaintiff(s):

RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried

Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur

Trustee(s):

Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried

Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau

Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder

Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans

Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams

2:00 PM

CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#13.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Counterclaim [19] Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint to Determine Dischargeability Pursuant to 11

U.S.C. §523(a)(6) and COUNTERCLAIM of Shatara Adrienne Thompson for Defamation, Counterclaim by Robert Lee Thompson Jr, Shatara Adrienne Thompson against Beatriz M Gutierrez

From: 8/2/18, 8/29/18 Also #14

Docket 19

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/9/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Defendant(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl

Joint Debtor(s):

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Plaintiff(s):

Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-20025

Robert Lee Thompson, Jr.

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01052 Gutierrez v. Thompson, Jr et al

#14.00 CONT Status Conference on Complaint filed on 3/1/18 to Determine Dischargeability of Debt Pursuant to 11 USC 523(a)(6)

From: 5/3/18, 8/2/18, 8/29/18 Also #13

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/9/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Robert Lee Thompson Jr. Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Defendant(s):

Robert Lee Thompson Jr Represented By Robert S Lampl

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Robert S Lampl

Joint Debtor(s):

Shatara Adrienne Thompson Represented By Nicholas M Wajda

Plaintiff(s):

Beatriz M Gutierrez Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-12440

Paul Pound

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01147 Lloyd v. Pound

#15.00 CONT Motion For Summary Judgment From: 11/14/18

Also #16 EH

Docket 6

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Paul Pound Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Paul M Pound Represented By Todd L Turoci

Movant(s):

April Lloyd Represented By

Chane Buck

Plaintiff(s):

April Lloyd Represented By

Chane Buck

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:18-12440

Paul Pound

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01147 Lloyd v. Pound

#16.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by April Lloyd against Paul M Pound. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud, 67 - Dischargeability - 523(a) (4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny, 68 - Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

From: 9/5/18, 11/14/18 Also #15

Docket 1

Debtor(s):

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Paul Pound Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Defendant(s):

Paul M Pound Represented By Todd L Turoci

Plaintiff(s):

April Lloyd Represented By

Chane Buck

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:14-12982

Sandra Maria Escalante

Chapter 13 #1.00 Motion to Avoid JUNIOR LIEN with HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES

Docket 58

Tentative Ruling:

The Court having reviewed the motion, good cause appearing, and noting the absence of any opposition, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, AVOIDING the lien of HSBC Mortgage Services upon receipt of a Chapter 13 discharge.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sandra Maria Escalante Represented By Leon D Bayer

Movant(s):

Sandra Maria Escalante Represented By Leon D Bayer

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-16710

Sean Kirkpatrick

Chapter 13 #2.00 Motion For Sanctions for Violation of the Automatic Stay EH

Docket 65

Marcus Edward Kanavalov

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion By United States Trustee To Dismiss Chapter 13 Case With A Re-Filing Bar

CASE DISMISSED 10/23/18

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

12/6/18

BACKGROUND

On October 5, 2018, Marcus Kanavalov ("Debtor") filed a skeletal Chapter 13 voluntary petition. Debtor had previously filed three bankruptcies. The first, a Chapter 7 in February 2002, resulted in Debtor received a discharge. The second, a Chapter 7 in June 2017, resulted in the discharge being withheld for failure to file the certificate of completion for the required course in personal finance management. The third, a Chapter 13 filed in November 2017, was dismissed at the confirmation hearing, with a 180-day bar to refiling. In the instant case, Debtor failed to disclose any of his prior cases.

On October 23, 2018, Debtor’s case was dismissed for failure to file case commencement documents. Later that day, UST filed a motion to dismiss the case for abuse, requesting a refiling bar of one year. The Court’s form dismissal order explicitly provides for the retention of jurisdiction relating to "any bar against being a debtor in bankruptcy."

11:00 AM

CONT...

Marcus Edward Kanavalov

Chapter 13

DISCUSSION

The disagreement revolves around whether the qualifier "Unless, the court, for cause, orders otherwise" modifies the content after the semi-colon. In re Leavitt noted this disagreement, but since the court was dealing with a dismissal with prejudice, rather than an injunction against refiling, it did not resolve the issue. 209 B.R. 935, 942 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997). Within the Ninth Circuit, it appears the trend is to adopt the reasoning of the Second Circuit and allow injunctions for more than 180 days, and the Court agrees with that reading of the statute. See e.g. In re Velasques, 2012 WL 8255582 at *3 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2012).

Here, the instant bankruptcy is Debtor’s third filing in the previous eighteen months in which Debtor failed to comply with the basic duties imposed upon an individual filing bankruptcy. Furthermore, Debtor failed to disclose his previous filings in the voluntary petition, which is signed under penalty of perjury. For this reasons, the

11:00 AM

CONT...

Marcus Edward Kanavalov

Chapter 13

Court is inclined to find the requested one-year refiling bar to be appropriate in the circumstances presented.

Moreover, Debtor’s failure to oppose is deemed consent to the relief requested pursuant to Local Rule 9013-1(h).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, imposing a re-filing bar of one year.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Marcus Edward Kanavalov Sr Pro Se

Movant(s):

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18113

Michelle Delahanty

Chapter 13 #7.00 Motion For Order Compelling Attorney to File Disclosure Of Compensation Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 329 and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2016

CASE DISMISSED 10/15/18

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:

12/6/18

BACKGROUND

On September 26, 2018, Michelle Delahanty ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 13 voluntary petition. On October 15, 2018, the case was dismissed for failure to file case commencement documents.

On October 31, 2018, UST filed a motion for an order compelling attorney to file disclosure of compensation pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 329. On November 13, 2018, Debtor’s attorney, Patricia Rodriguez ("Counsel"), filed her disclosure of compensation. Counsel also filed an opposition to UST’s motion, stating that the filing of her disclosure of compensation rendered the motion moot.

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 329(a) states:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Michelle Delahanty

Chapter 13

Any attorney representing a debtor in a case under this title, or in connection with such a case, whether or not such attorney applies for compensation under this title, shall file with the court a statement of the compensation paid or agreed to be paid, if such payment or agreement was made after one year before the date of the filing of the petition, for services rendered or to be rendered in contemplation of or in connection with the case by such attorney, and the source of such compensation.

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 2016(b) provides further details regarding the requirements imposed by § 329. Here, Debtor’s counsel has failed to file the required disclosure of compensation. The Court has authority to enter an order directing the disclosure of such compensation, and will routinely direct Debtor’s counsel to file the required disclosure. See, e.g., In re Shuma, 124 B.R. 668, 677 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1991).

Here, Counsel has filed the required disclosure of compensation. The Court will retain jurisdiction over any matter relating to § 329 to allow UST to review the filed disclosure of compensation.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion as MOOT and retain jurisdiction over any matter related to § 329.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Michelle Delahanty Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Michelle Delahanty

Patricia Rodriguez

Chapter 13

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #8.00 CONT Motion to (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No. 6:17-ap-01187 MH, which is a Conflict of Interest; (3) Request for an Accounting and Claim Numbers on any Unsecured Debts Rule 71 in Adversary Proceeding Case No 6:17-ap-01187 MH and Chapter 13 Case No 6:16-bk-16720 MH; (4) Memorandum of Points and Authorities; (5) Declaration of Luevina Henry

CASE DISMISSED 7/25/18

From: 10/25/18 Also #

Docket 187

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#9.00 CONT Motion to vacate (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No.

6:17-ap-01187 MH, which is a Conflict of Interest; (3) Request for an Accounting and Claim Numbers on any Unsecured Debts Rule 71 in Adversary Proceeding Case No 6:17-ap-01187 MH and Chapter 13 Case No 6:16-bk-16720 MH; (4) Memorandum of Points and Authorities; (5) Declaration of Luevina Henry

From: 10/25/18 Also #10

Docket 110

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#10.00 CONT Status Conference on Complaint fld 8-25-17 - Dischargeability, willful and malicious injury, validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property, injunctive relief

From: 11/16/17, 11/1/18 Also #9

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-10795

Agnes Smith

Chapter 13 #11.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency EH

Docket 109

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Agnes Smith Represented By

James T Lillard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-17536

Gracey Hunter

Chapter 13 #12.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18, 11/15/18

Docket 80

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Gilberto Linares Represented By Jaime A Cuevas Jr.

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-15541

Alejandro Guillen and Karla Guillen

Chapter 13 #16.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 28

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Alejandro Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Joint Debtor(s):

Karla Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-15617

Juan Vargas and Anabely E Vargas

Chapter 13 #17.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 40

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Juan Vargas Represented By

Todd L Turoci

Joint Debtor(s):

Anabely E Vargas Represented By Todd L Turoci

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

Monday, December 10, 2018

Hearing Room

303

9:30 AM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al

#1.00 Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01211. Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason. willful and malicious injury)) (Fernandez, Lazaro)

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUE FOR PRETRIAL ON 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Joint Debtor(s):

Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Plaintiff(s):

Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

Trustee(s):

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

9:30 AM

6:16-11635

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01211 Olivares v. Dason et al

#1.00 CONT Trial RE: [1] Adversary case 6:16-ap-01211. Complaint by Juddy Olivares, Eric A Panitz against Sam Daniel Dason. willful and malicious injury)) (Fernandez, Lazaro)

From: 12/10/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUE FOR PRETRIAL ON 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Defendant(s):

Sam Daniel Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Joint Debtor(s):

Greeta Sam Dason Represented By Robert G Uriarte

Plaintiff(s):

Juddy Olivares Represented By Lazaro E Fernandez Robert P Goe Charity J Manee

9:30 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Sam Daniel Dason

Chapter 7

Lynda T. Bui (TR) Represented By Brett Ramsaur

11:00 AM

6:10-11814

Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco

Chapter 7 #2.00 CONT Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation From: 12/5/18

Docket 41

Tentative Ruling:

12/11/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

11 U.S.C. § 326(a) states:

In a case under chapter 7 or 11, the court may allow reasonable compensation under section 330 of this title of the trustee for the trustee’s services, payable after the trustee renders such services, not to exceed 25 percent on the first

$5,000 or less, 10 percent on any amount in excess of $5,000 but not in excess of $50,000, 5 percent on any amount in excess of $50,000 but not in excess of

$1,000,000, and reasonable compensation not to exceed 3 percent of any moneys in excess of $1,000,000, upon all moneys disbursed or turned over in the case by the trustee to parties in interest, excluding the debtor, but including holders of secured claims.

(emphasis added).

Trustee is basing his requested compensation in this case on $185,000 in "receipts," but that amount includes $72,908.11 paid to Aylstock, Witkin, Kreis & Overholtz, PLLC which does not appear properly categorized as a receipt because these moneys were not, at any time, held or administered by Trustee, let alone received by Trustee, or disbursed by Trustee. Specifically, paragraph 8 of the motion to approve settlement [Dkt. No. 2] indicates that the costs and expenses of certain status litigation were to be paid directly by the settlement fund trustee, and only the remaining funds would

11:00 AM

CONT...

Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco

Chapter 7

actually be received by the Chapter 7 Trustee. To wit:

Subject to the terms of the settlement being satisfied, the balance of the remaining settlement proceeds, after the Settlement Fund Trustee pays and/or withholds the necessary expenses, fees, costs, holdbacks, and deductions from the Gross Settlement Amount, anticipated to be in the amount of $97,897.75 (the "Remaining Proceeds") shall be disbursed from the Settlement Fund Trustee to the Trustee.

Not only are the requested fees simply incompatible with the plain language of the statute, which calculates fees based on moneys disbursed or turned over by the trustee, the fees cannot be reasonably justified on policy grounds. In this case, the state court counsel incurred significant legal fees litigating a state court matter while the instant bankruptcy was closed. The state court counsel’s work on this matter was, in no matter whatsoever, related to the administration of the bankruptcy estate, and Trustee did not participate in, direct, or even have an awareness of the fees incurred. Case law notes that important distinction:

The reported decisions construing section 326(a) have recognized a distinction between funds that are constructively received and funds that are actually received. These cases stand for the proposition that a commission can only be calculated upon the funds actually received by the trustee. In this particular case, the trustee never received any settlement proceeds that were paid directly to the debtor’s personal injury counsel in fees and expenses or to the worker’s compensation carrier.

In re Guido, 237 B.R. 562, 564-65 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1999) (citations omitted); see also Kandel v. Alexander Leasing Corp., 107 B.R. 548 (N.D. Ohio 1988) (proceeds of settlement were not "money disbursed" where the trustee cannot point to any time at which the moneys actually passed through his hands); In re New England Fish Co., 34

B.R. 899, 902 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1983) ("[I]n view of the majority of the cases under prior law and the plain and unambiguous wording of section 326(a), this Court concludes that the trustee’s compensation must be based on actual monies disbursed

11:00 AM

CONT...

Scott Leon Bosco and Karen Lee Bosco

Chapter 7

to parties in interest, and not on assets or settlements which can be construed as a constructive disbursement.").

In light of the foregoing, the Court is inclined to reduce the basis upon which Trustee’s statutory fee is calculated, eliminating those amounts which were at no time administered, held, received, or disbursed by Trustee. The remaining cognizable disbursements appear to be a bank service fee of $117.34, Trustee’s expenses in the amount of $778.22, and payments to creditors in the amount of $4,027.61, for an aggregate amount of $4,923.17. Therefore, the Court is inclined to approve Trustee’s fees in the reduced amount of $1,230.79. The Court has reviewed the itemized expenses filed by Trustee, and finding them reasonable, the Court is inclined to approve the expenses in the amount of $778.22

APPEARANCES REQUIRED. If Applicant submits on the tentative, Applicant’s appearance is waived.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Scott Leon Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Karen Lee Bosco Represented By Richard H Travis Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Justin Witkin

11:00 AM

6:14-16813

M. A. Tabor

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01128 Frealy v. Trotochau et al

#3.00 CONT Application and Order for Appearance and Examination From: 12/5/18

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

M. A. Tabor Represented By

Judith Runyon

Defendant(s):

Robin Sherrie Trotochau Pro Se

Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc. Represented By

Leib M Lerner

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Plaintiff(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

M. A. Tabor

Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Chapter 7

11:00 AM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7 #4.00 CONT Motion of Chapter 7 Trustee to Approve Compromise of Controversy From: 12/5/18

Docket 60

Tentative Ruling:

12/11/18

BACKGROUND

On September 15, 2017, Cleon Sonnenfeld ("Creditor") filed a Chapter 7 involuntary petition against Joshua Richardson ("Debtor"). On November 8, 2017, an order for relief was entered pursuant to stipulation between Creditor and Debtor. That same day, the Court entered an order approving a stipulation which avoided a deed of trust recorded on June 20, 2017, against Debtor’s residence, in favor of HLE Law Group.

On February 6, 2018, Creditor removed certain state court litigation to bankruptcy court. The state court litigation contained causes of action for: (1) breach of contract;

fraud; (3) unjust enrichment; (4) constructive trust; and (5) declaratory relief. On June 29, 2018, Creditor filed a complaint to determine dischargeability and to deny Debtor a discharge.

On November 8, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to approve compromise. No opposition to the motion has been filed.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7
The dispute between Creditor and Debtor relates to a loan made by Creditor to Debtor in 2012 for the total amount of $225,000. According to the instant motion, the purpose of the loan was for Debtor to purchase certain real property located in Moreno Valley, California (the "Property"). Creditor asserts that Debtor breached the loan agreement by failing to provide Creditor with a deed of trust, and that, as a result, the Property is subject to a constructive trust in favor of Creditor. The compromise motion also deals with potential avoidance actions against Gabriela Diaz.

The compromise under consideration contains the following components. First, Creditor shall obtain a stipulated judgment in the removed action, adjudicating that the Property is subject to a constructive trust and that Creditor is entitled to a judgment in the amount of $318,778.12. Second, Trustee shall sell the Property. The first $303,000 of the sale proceeds would be payable to Creditor1, while any amount exceeding $303,000 would be divided so that the bankruptcy estate receives 30% and Creditor receives 70%.2 Third, Trustee would assign the potential avoidance actions against Gabriela Diaz to Creditor, with any net recoveries to be distributed 30% to the bankruptcy estate and 70% to Creditor. The compromise motion also contemplates that Creditor will object to Debtor’s homestead exemption.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019 provides that:

On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have previously outlined the factors to be considered in approving a compromise pursuant to Rule 9019: (1) the probability of success in the litigation; (2) the difficulties to be encountered in the matter of
11:00 AM
CONT...

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7
collection; (3) the complexity, expense, inconvenience and delay of litigation; and (4) the interest of creditors with deference to their reasonable. See In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986). The listed factors assist the Court in determining "the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of a proposed settlement agreement." Id.

There are a variety of material details which are not adequately addressed in the compromise motion under consideration, hindering the Court’s review of the fairness and reasonableness of the compromise These issues are enumerated below:
1. While the motion does not provide the relevant information, the Court takes judicial notice of Schedule A [Dkt. No. 19] and Schedule C [Dkt. No. 21]; these schedules indicate that Debtor identified the Property as having a fair market value of $303,000 and claimed an exemption in the amount of
  $100,000. If these figures are correct, and subject to the issue listed below, it would appear any recovery by the estate from the sale of the Property would be contingent on a successful objection to Debtor’s homestead exemption, which has not yet been filed nor been detailed in the instant motion.
2. It is unclear from the motion, but to the extent that the motion attempts to pay unsecured creditors prior to satisfying Debtor’s homestead exemption, such approach is impermissible. While the settlement agreement frames the approach as paying the HLE lien, there is, quite simply, no HLE lien and, to the extent that Creditor is offering a carve-out of $25,000, the compromise does not articulate a legal basis by which the such amounts could be used to pay unsecured creditors prior to satisfying the homestead exemption.
3. It appears that Creditor may be receiving a small windfall from the proposed compromise, which is not adequately explained or detailed. The Court takes judicial notice of the removed state court complaint and notes that Creditor requested a judgment of $252,516.94. The Court also takes judicial notice of the claims register, and notes that Creditor filed an unsecured claim on April 13, 2018, in the amount of $301,167.85 ("Claim 2"). Based on the record before the Court, it appears that the proposed compromise transforms Claim 2 into a secured claim and increases the claim amount by approximately
  $17,000. Additionally, the proposed compromise would further increase Creditor’s recovery depending upon the sale price of the Property or success in the potential avoidance actions.
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Joshua Cord Richardson
4. The consideration the estate is receiving from this compromise, on the other hand, is unclear and speculative, given that any recovery by the estate appears to be conditioned on a successful objection to Debtor’s homestead exemption,

Chapter 7

depends upon the sale price of the Property, which has not been detailed in the motion, and also depends upon the recovery in the potential avoidance actions, which has not been described at all.

On the record before the Court, the Court is simply unable to ascertain the fairness or reasonableness of the proposed compromise.

TENTATIVE RULING

Parties to address the issues above, and the Court may CONTINUE the matter for supplemental briefing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

11:00 AM

6:18-17887

Rob Johannes Devocht

Chapter 7 #5.00 CONT Motion to Reconsider Dismissal of Case/Motion From Relief From Judgment/Order Pursuant To Fed.R.Bankr.P. 9024 And Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure 60 And Extend Time To File Forms Required For Discharge

From: 12/5/18 EH

Docket 14

Tentative Ruling:

12/11/18

BACKGROUND

On September 18, 2018, Rob Devocht ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. That same day, the Court automatically generated two deficiency notices. Docket Number 3 is the "Case Commencement Deficiency Notice" which informs Debtor that he is required to file the declaration as to whether income was received from an employer within sixty days of the petition date. Docket Number 4 is the "Notice of Dismissal of Case if Required Documents Are Not Filed or Signed" which informs Debtor that he is required to file the statement about your social security numbers.

On September 20, 2018, Debtor filed the statement about your socials security number. Debtor failed to file the income declaration, however, and, on November 5, 2018, the case was dismissed.

On November 7, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to reconsider dismissal.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rob Johannes Devocht

Chapter 7

DISCUSSION

While Debtor’s motion to vacate dismissal cites FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1) and (6), the motion fails to articulate the appropriate legal standard or apply that standard to the facts of the case. Nevertheless, the Court notes that Local Rule 1017-2(c)(1) states:

Any motion requesting that the dismissal of a case for failure to file a required document or for failure to appear at the meeting of creditors be vacated must include as exhibits to the motion all of the documents that were not timely filed and must be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing a sufficient explanation why the documents were not timely filed. The motion may be ruled on without further notice or hearing pursuant to LBR 9013-1(q).

Therefore, the Court will construe the instant motion as a motion pursuant to Local Rule 1017-2(c)(1). The Court notes that the deficient document is attached to the motion, although not authenticated and somewhat incomplete, and that the declaration submitted contains a reasonably sufficient explanation why the document was not timely filed.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, VACATING dismissal. Debtor is instructed to file the outstanding income declaration within thirty days of the entry of the order vacating dismissal, or the case may be dismissed without further notice.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Rob Johannes Devocht

Party Information

Chapter 7

Rob Johannes Devocht Represented By Gilbert A Diaz

Movant(s):

Rob Johannes Devocht Represented By Gilbert A Diaz Gilbert A Diaz

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16798

Renard Louis Hamilton and Regina Elizabeth Hamilton

Chapter 7 #1.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and United Auto Credit Corporation re: 2015 Hyundai Sonata

From: 11/14/18 EH

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Renard Louis Hamilton Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Regina Elizabeth Hamilton Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

10:00 AM

6:18-16713

Danny Arthur Goodro and Marina Hernandez Goodro

Chapter 7 #2.00 CONT Pro se Reaffirmation Agreement Between Debtor and Alaska USA Federal Credit Union re 2014 Chevrolet Cruze

From: 11/14/18 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Danny Arthur Goodro Represented By Dina Farhat

Joint Debtor(s):

Marina Hernandez Goodro Represented By Dina Farhat

Trustee(s):

Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18319

Timothy John Hill

Chapter 7 #3.00 CONT Motion For Order Compelling Attorney To File Disclosure Of Compensation Pursuant To 11 U.S.C. § 329 And Federal Rule Of Bankruptcy Procedure 2016

From: 12/5/18

CASE DISMISSED 10/29/18

Docket 16

Tentative Ruling:

12/12/18

BACKGROUND

On October 1, 2018, Timothy Hill ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On October 29, 2018, the case was dismissed for failure to file case commencement documents.

On November 7, 2018, UST filed a motion for an order compelling attorney to file disclosure of compensation pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 329.

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Timothy John Hill

Chapter 7

11 U.S.C. § 329(a) states:

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, ordering Debtor’s counsel, Marc Grossman, to file the required statement of attorney compensation. Pending UST’s review of the disclosure of compensation, the Court will retain jurisdiction over matters related to 11 U.S.C. § 329.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Timothy John Hill Represented By Marc E Grossman

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Timothy John Hill

Chapter 7

United States Trustee (RS) Represented By

Abram Feuerstein esq

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-15107

Jesus Davila Romero

Chapter 7 #4.00 CONT Motion to Convert Case From Chapter 7 to 13 From: 11/28/18

Docket 30

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jesus Davila Romero Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Movant(s):

Jesus Davila Romero Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay

11:00 AM

6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7 #5.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Bankruptcy Case From: 10/17/18, 10/24/18, 11/28/18

Also #6 EH

Docket 47

Tentative Ruling:

10/17/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 10, 2018, the Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy ("Motion"). A notice of Non-opposition was filed by Lui Bin on the same date.

Opposition to the Motion was filed by Luczynski and the Trustee on October 3, 2018 (the "Oppositions"). The Debtor filed an Omnibus Reply to the Oppositions on October 10, 2018 ("Reply").

DISCUSSION

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

The Debtor seeks dismissal pursuant to § 305(a)(1). Section 305(a)(1)

Chapter 7

provides as follows:

The court, after notice and a hearing, may dismiss a case under this title, or may suspend all proceedings in a case under this title, at any time if—

the interests of creditors and the debtor would be better served by such dismissal or suspension;

11 U.S.C. § 305(a)(1); In re Eastman, 188 B.R. 621, 625 (9th Cir. BAP 1995). The

H.R.Rep. No. 95–595, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 325 (1977); 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963,

6281.

The Oppositions essentially assert that (1) Luczynski has filed a proof of claim

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7

that constitutes prima facie evidence of a claim; and (2) avoidable insider payments have been discovered that will benefit the Debtor’s creditors.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Debtor has not met its burden of demonstrating that both the Debtor and creditors will be "better served" by dismissal.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Movant(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe

11:00 AM

CONT...

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7

11:00 AM

6:18-13057

Desert Ice Castle, LLC

Chapter 7 #6.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims Disallowing Claim No. 1 of Andrzej Luczynski Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502

From: 10/24/18, 11/28/18 Also #5

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Movant(s):

Desert Ice Castle, LLC Represented By Paul M Stoddard

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe

Thomas J Eastmond

11:00 AM

6:18-12625

Harold Roy Williams and Alice Gwendolyn Williams

Chapter 7 #7.00 Motion to Disallow Claims #1 re County of San Bernardino, Office of the Tax Collector

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

12/12/2018

BACKGROUND:

On March 30, 2018, Harold and Alice Williams (collectively, "Debtors") filed their petition for chapter 7 relief. Robert Whitmore is the duly appointed chapter 7 trustee ("Trustee"). On November 9, 2018, the Trustee filed objection to Claim No. 1 of the County of San Bernardino (the "County"). The Trustee requests that absent amendment by the County to their claim to specify any portion of the claim that is unsecured, that the Court enter an order allowing the claim as fully secured only, and disallowed to the extent no unsecured portion is claimed. Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Trustee’s Objection in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Harold Roy Williams Represented By Jacqueline D Serrao

11:00 AM

CONT...

Harold Roy Williams and Alice Gwendolyn Williams

Chapter 7

Joint Debtor(s):

Alice Gwendolyn Williams Represented By Jacqueline D Serrao

Movant(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-10074

Charlie W Parker

Chapter 7 #8.00 CONT Motion (1) For Sale of Real Property, Subject To Overbid; (2) Authorizing Sale Free And Clear Of Liens And Interests; (3) Authorizing Release Of Funds From Escrow; And (4) Approving Payment Of Real Estate Commissions

From: 12/5/18 EH

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

12/5/18

BACKGROUND

On January 5, 2018, Charlie Parker ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Schedule A identified certain real property located at 26076 Cohoe Loop Rd., Kasiloff, AK 99610 (the "Property"). Schedule A identified the value of the Property as $70,100, and appears to identify Debtor as the 50% owner of the Property.

Schedule C purported to exempt the Property in full. On February 14, 2018, Debtor filed amended schedules indicating that he owned co-owned the Property with Andrea Parker; Debtor also appears to have removed his claimed exemption in the Property. On March 7, 2018, Debtor amended his schedules again, although it is unclear whether this amendment purported to exempt the Property in full or remove any exemption in the Property. On April 16, 2018, Debtor received a discharge. On July 18, 2018, Debtor amended his schedules again, this time increasing the value of the Property to $75,000 and indicating that his interest was as a tenant in common; the Schedule C filed on this date does not contain any mention of any real property exemption.

On November 12, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for an order: (1) approving sale of real

11:00 AM

CONT...

Charlie W Parker

Chapter 7

property, subject to overbids; (2) authorizing sale free and clear of liens and interests;

authorizing release of funds from escrow; and (4) approving payment of real estate commissions. Trustee proposes to sell the property to Matthew Hall & Donna Kerrigan (the "Purchasers") for $60,000. Proposed payments from the proceeds include: (1) $3,600 for real estate commission; (2) $1,200 for escrow charges and fees; (3) $1,244.42 for property taxes; and (4) $26,977.79 to co-owner (Debtor’s ex- wife), leaving $26,977.79 for the bankruptcy estate.

DISCUSSION
1. Sale of Estate Property
  
  11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1) allows a trustee to sell property of the estate outside of the ordinary course, after notice and a hearing. A sale pursuant to § 363(b) requires a demonstration that the sale has a valid business justification. In re 240 North Brand Parners, Ltd., 200 B.R. 653, 659 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1996). "In approving any sale outside the ordinary course of business, the court must not only articulate a sufficient business reason for the sale, it must further find it is in the best interest of the estate,
  i.e. it is fair and reasonable, that it has been given adequate marketing, that it has been negotiated and proposed in good faith, that the purchaser is proceeding in good faith, and that it is an "arms-length" transaction." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal.).
  
  The motion contains some evidence of the Property’s marketing and also indicates that Trustee has received multiple offers for the Property, the latter offer representing a 20% increase over the original offer. Given the fact that the sale appears to be a good faith, arms-length transaction, and the fact that the estate would receive approximately $27,000 for distribution to unsecured creditors, the Court concludes that Trustee has articulated an adequate business reason for the sale.
2. Sale Free & Clear of Liens
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Charlie W Parker
  
  Chapter 7
  
  11 U.S.C. § 363(f) (2010) states:
  1. The trustee may sell property under subsection (b) or (c) of this section free and clear of any interest in such property of an entity other than the estate, only if-
    1. applicable nonbankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest;
    2. such entity consents;
    3. such interest is a lien and the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on such property;
    4. such interest is in bona fide dispute; or
    5. such entity could be compelled, in a legal or equitable proceeding, to accept a money satisfaction of such interest.
  Here, the only liens on the Property relate to property taxes in the amount of
  $1,244.42. This amount is far less than the sale price of the Property and, therefore, § 363(f)(3) permits Trustee to sell the Property free and clear of liens.
3. 14-Day Stay
  
  FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(h) states: "An order authorizing the use, sale, or lease of property other than cash collateral is stayed until the expiration of 14 days after entry of the order, unless the court orders otherwise." The Court deems the absence of objections to be consent to the relief requested, pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), and, therefore, will waive the stay of Rule 6004(h).
  11:00 AM
  CONT...
  
  Charlie W Parker
  
  Chapter 7
4. Miscellaneous Provisions

The Court has reviewed the remainder of Trustee’s miscellaneous requests. The Court has reviewed the proposed overbidding procedures and finds such procedures to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed the requested Broker compensation of 6% of the sale price (totaling $3,600) and finds such compensation to be reasonable and customary. The Court has reviewed Trustee’s proposed distribution of sale proceeds, and the Court finds that such distribution is reasonable and proper.

Finally, the Court has reviewed the declarations of the Purchasers, and finds the declarations sufficient for a determination that the Purchasers are good faith purchasers pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363 (m).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion in its entirety. Specifically, the Court is inclined to authorize the sale of the Property free and clear of liens, approve the overbid procedures, approve the Broker’s compensation, determine that the Purchasers are good faith purchasers, waive the 14-day stay under Rule 6004(h), and authorize the proposed payments from the sale proceeds.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Charlie W Parker

Party Information

Chapter 7

Charlie W Parker Represented By David J Workman

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung

Roquemore Pringle & Moore Inc

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Toan B Chung

Roquemore Pringle & Moore Inc

11:00 AM

6:17-20440

Daniel Ramon Reyes and Evelyn Reyes

Chapter 7 #9.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Docket 28

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

12/12/2018

No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The Trustee’s Final Report has been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report, the following administrative claims will be allowed:

Trustee Fees: $ 1,102.25 Trustee Expenses: $ 30

The Trustee may submit on the tentative.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Daniel Ramon Reyes Represented By Rex Tran

Joint Debtor(s):

Evelyn Reyes Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Daniel Ramon Reyes and Evelyn Reyes

Rex Tran

Chapter 7

Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #10.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 8 filed by Sake Consulting Engineers, Inc. as Not Allowable Against the Estate

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18, 10/24/18 Also #11 & #12

Docket 104

Tentative Ruling:

09/26/2018

BACKGROUND:

On August 6, 2018, the Claimant filed its response to the Objection ("Response"). On September 19, 2018, the Trustee filed his reply ("Reply")

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure ("FRBP") 3001(f). Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2000). When a party files an objection to a proof of claim, that filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection disallowing Claim No. 8 of the Claimant.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta - INACTIVE -

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #11.00 CONT Motion to Disallow Claims No. 10 filed by Gouvis Engineering Consulting Group, Inc. as Not Allowable Against Estate

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18, 10/24/18 Also #10 & #12

Docket 108

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

APPLICABLE LAW:

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502(a), a proof of claim is deemed allowed unless a party in interest objects. Absent an objection, a proof of claim constitutes prima facie

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

ANALYSIS:

TENTATIVE RULING

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection and DISALLOW Claim No. 10 in its entirety.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta - INACTIVE -

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:15-18887

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7 #12.00 CONT Motion to Allow Claim 7 filed by Norman A. Musselman as Fully Secured, Not Entitled to a Dividend

From: 8/22/18, 9/26/18, 10/24/18 Also #10 & #11

Docket 102

Tentative Ruling:

08/22/2018

BACKGROUND:

APPLICABLE LAW:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

filing "creates a dispute which is a contested matter" within the meaning of FRBP 9014 and the Court must resolve the matter after notice and opportunity for hearing upon a motion for relief. Id.

When a creditor has filed a proof of claim that complies with the rules (thereby giving rise to the presumption of validity), the burden shifts to the objecting party who must "present evidence to overcome the prima facie case." United States v. Offord Fin., Inc., (In re Medina), 205 B.R. 216,222 (9th Cir. BAP 1996). To defeat the claim, the objecting party must provide sufficient evidence and "show facts tending to defeat the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039 (quoting In re Holm, 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991)). "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." Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1040 (quoting In re Allegheny Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)). If the objecting party produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts back to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ashford v.

Lundell, 223 F.3d at 1039; Holm, 931 F.2d at 623.

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC

Chapter 7

Manors San Bernardino Ave LLC Represented By

Gaurav Datta - INACTIVE -

Movant(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Scott Talkov Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #13.00 CONT Motion Objecting To Debtors Claims Of Exemption In Proceeds From Personal Injury Case Pursuant To CCP § 704.140(b)

From: 10/24/18, 12/5/18 Also #14

Docket 46

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Trustee(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

11:00 AM

6:11-19270

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7 #14.00 CONT Motion To Reconsider Order Allowing Debtors To File Amended Schedules

From: 10/24/18, 12/5/18 Also #13

Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:

12/19/18

BACKGROUND

On March 22, 2011, Rene Ferrer & Lucia Lopez ("Debtors") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On July 27, 2011, Debtors received a discharge and, one week later, the case was closed.

On August 11, 2017, Debtors filed a motion to reopen the case. It does not appear that Debtors promptly and properly uploaded an order on the motion, and the case was not actually reopened until the entry of an order (the "Order") June 8, 2018, which also allowed Debtors to amend their schedules, setting a deadline of September 6, 2018 for such amendment to be completed. On June 29, 2018, Debtors amended their schedules. On Schedule B, Debtors listed certain pelvic repair system products liability litigation, of an unknown value, and, on Schedule C, Debtors claimed an exemption in the litigation of, again, unknown value.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7

On July 25, 2018, Debtors filed a motion objecting to Debtors’ claim of exemptions. Debtors filed their response on August 15, 2018. In their response, Debtors conceded that they improperly claimed exemptions pursuant to both § 703 and § 704. On August 28, 2018, Debtors amended their schedules to correct the improperly claimed exemptions.

In its objection, Trustee also argued that it was improper for Debtors to amend their schedules without notice and a hearing. The Court’s tentative ruling issued prior to the hearing on August 29, 2018, noted that there was conflicting case law on the issue, and noted that the Court had already entered the Order permitting Debtors to amend their schedules.

On September 27, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to reconsider the Order, and set a hearing for October 24, 2018. On October 22, 2018, two days before the hearing, Debtors filed their opposition. The opposition, however, appears to have simply been an identical copy of their opposition in the last motion.

At the hearing on October 24, 2018, the Court noted that Debtors’ opposition was filed twelve days late, and, because it was simply a copy of a response filed prior to the filing of the motion to reconsider, did not actually address the contents of the motion to reconsider. The Court set a new briefing schedule, and sanctioned Debtors’ counsel in the amount of $1,580 to reimburse the costs of Trustee’s attorney. On November 14, 2018, Debtors filed their amended opposition. On November 28, 2018, Trustee filed its reply.

DISCUSSION

Trustee moves under FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b)(1)-(6),1 incorporated into bankruptcy proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9024. Rule 60(b)(1)-(6) states:

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
1. mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(6) any other reason that justifies relief

Chapter 7

As noted by Trustee, "errors of law are cognizable under Rule 60(b)." Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. EEOC, 691 F.2d 438, 441 (9th Cir. 1982).

To determine whether an error of law, or a mistake, was made in the present case, the Court turns to the underlying legal question: whether Debtor retains the right to amend the schedules, as a matter of course, in a reopened case. The two operative rules are FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1009(a) and Rule 9006(b)(1). FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 1009(a)

states, in relevant part: "A voluntary petition, list, schedule, or statement may be amended by the debtor as a matter of course at any time before the case is closed." FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9006(b)(1) states:

Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subdivision, when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified period by these rules or by a notice given thereunder or by order of court, the court for cause shown may at any time in its discretion (1) with or without motion or notice order the period enlarged if the request therefor is made before the expiration of the period originally prescribed or as extended by a previous order or (2) on motion made after the expiration of the specified period permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.

As noted in the Court’s tentative ruling of August 29, 2018, there is a split in caselaw as to whether Rule 1009(a) operates to require a motion pursuant to Rule 9006(b)(1) in order for a debtor to amend their schedules in a reopened case. See, e.g., In re Dollman, 583 B.R. 268, 271-73 (Bankr. D.N.M. 2017) (summarizing different approaches); 9 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 1009.02[3] (16th ed. 2015) ("Once the

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7

case has been closed, a debtor may have to show excusable neglect in order to amend the schedule of exemptions."). But see In re Goswani, 304 B.R. 386, 392 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2003) ("If the drafters had intended to require court permission before the filing of amended schedules in reopened cases, they would have explicitly said so.").

As a preliminary matter, Debtors primary argument in opposition to the motion to reconsider appears to be that In re Goswani is binding law. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel is not, however, binding. See In re Zimmer, 313 F.3d 1220, 1225 n.3 (9th Cir.

2002) ("Although the binding nature of Bankruptcy Appellate Panel decisions – an open question in this circuit – is not squarely before us in this case, we join Judge O’Scannlain’s call for the Judicial Council to consider an order clarifying whether the bankruptcy courts must follow the BAP."); see also Bank of Maui v. Estate Analysis, Inc., 904 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1990) (noting that the BAP has declared itself binding but stating that its "binding effect is so uncertain"). A review of the case law indicates that bankruptcy judges in this district are split on the issue. See, e.g., In re Arnold, 471

B.R. 578 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2012). This Court agrees with In re Arnold that in the absence of definitive guidance, in whatever form, declaring that the BAP is binding, BAP decisions do not have binding effect.

Nevertheless, BAP opinions certainly can be persuasive, although this Court has a duty to consider the reasoning detailed in the decision. The Court does not consider the decision relied upon by Debtors, In re Goswani, to be persuasive. As noted by In re Dollman, 583 B.R. 268, 271-273 (Bankr. D.N.M. 2017), three different approaches to this issue have been developed.

First, the broad approach, as articulated in In re Goswani, essentially concludes that there is no difference between an open (never closed) case and a re-opened case.

However, "[r]eading Rule 1009(a) to permit a debtor to amend schedules in a reopened case anytime as a matter of course before the case is re-closed would make the limiting clause, "at any time before the case is closed," inoperative and superfluous because schedules can be amended only in an open case." Dollman, at

272. Based on the reasoning in Dollman, the Court concludes that Rule 1009(a) does impose a deadline – the closing of the case – and rejects the broad approach’s attempt to reverse time and undo the passing of that deadline.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7

Second, the Court rejects the narrow approach, which prohibits any amendment to schedules after a case is closed, then reopened, for the simple reason that this approach does not explain why Rule 9006(b)(1) is inapplicable to the instant situation. Id. ("The Court finds the narrow approach too restrictive. It fails to recognize or apply Rule 9006(b)(1) allowing enlargement of time under certain circumstances if the period has expired before the motion to enlarge time is filed.").

Consequently, the Court finds the middle approach to be the appropriate approach. Rule 1009(a) imposed a deadline for amendment of the schedules – the closing of the case – and that deadline passed in the instant case. Rule 9006(b)(1), however, affords Debtors an opportunity to file a motion to amend their schedules, which, however, did not occur in the instant case.

Returning to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 60(b), the Court first concludes it is inappropriate to vacate judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(1) on the basis of a mistake or error in law. When different courts have taken different approaches on the legal issue, and there is no binding guidance on the issue, it would appear inappropriate to classify one of those approaches as an "error in law" as that phrase is used in the context of a Rule 60(b) motion. See generally Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 691 F.2d at 440-441 (collecting cases).

Nevertheless, the Court believes relief pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6) is appropriate in the instant case. Rule 60(b)(6) "gives the [ ] court power to vacate judgments ‘whenever such action is appropriate to accomplish justice." U.S. v. Sparks, 685 F.2d 1128, 1130 (9th Cir. 1982) (quoting Klapprott v. U.S., 335 U.S. 601, 615 (1949)). "In order to obtain such relief from a judgment, however, ‘extraordinary circumstances’ must exist." Id. (quoting Ackerman v. U.S., 340 U.S. 193, 199 (1950)).

Here, the extraordinary circumstances in the present case are that the Local Rules, specifically Local Rule 5010-1, provide that a motion to reopen the case may be ruled on without a hearing or opportunity to object. Therefore, Trustee was essentially

11:00 AM

CONT...

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Chapter 7

precluded from presenting his argument that caselaw is split regarding the propriety of allowing a debtor to amend their schedules in a reopened case without a noticed motion. The only route Trustee had to present its argument was in the form of a Rule 60(b)(6) motion. Given that the Court agrees with Trustee’s argument, and given that Trustee was effectively precluded from introducing its argument in any other manner, the Court concludes that Rule 60(b)(6) relief is appropriate in the instance case.

The Court declines to address the parties’ arguments regarding the "neglect" of Debtors, and whether such neglect was excusable, at the current time. Debtors are free to bring a motion under Rule 9006(b)(1), and present their argument that the failure to properly schedule and exempt the litigation was the result of "excusable neglect," as that term is interpreted in the context of the rule.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, AMENDING the order of June 8, 2018 [Dkt. No. 24], striking ¶¶ 3 and 4 of the order. As such, the amended schedules filed by Debtors are void and of no effect. Debtors may move to amend their schedules pursuant to the applicable rules outlined above.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rene Antonio Ferrer Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Joint Debtor(s):

Lucia Margarita Lopez Represented By Christopher J Lauria

Movant(s):

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rene Antonio Ferrer and Lucia Margarita Lopez

Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

Chapter 7

Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Stephen Reider

2:00 PM

6:18-16831

Young Jin Yoon

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01210 Kim v. Yoon et al

#15.00 Motion with Notice to Expunge Lis Pendens and for Award of Attorney's Fees and Costs

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

BACKGROUND

On August 13, 2018, Young Jin Yoon ("Debtor") filed a petition for chapter 7 relief. On November 27, 2018, Vivian Kim ("Plaintiff") filed her complaint to determine dischargeability of a debt pursuant to §§ 523(a)(2) and (a)(6) (the "Complaint"). Plaintiff asserts in her Complaint that she loaned money to Debtor and his wife. Plaintiff further asserts that Debtor and his wife employed the funds loaned by Plaintiff to purchase certain real property located at 32229 Cedar Crest in Temecula, CA 92592 (the "Property"). Plaintiff further alleges that Debtor and his wife transferred the Property for no consideration to their son Joshua Park ("Park"), but then themselves made maintenance and mortgage payments on the Property. The Plaintiff’s primary assertion is that the Defendant and his family used her loan to purchase the Property and have since sought to hinder her in her ability to recover against the Property’s value.

On November 12, 2018, Defendant Park filed a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens and For Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs ("Motion") which Plaintiff opposed on 11/27/2018 ("Opposition"). No reply has been filed.

DISCUSSION

The grounds for expungement of an improperly recorded lis pendens are:

Invalid service of the notice;
Failure to plead a real property claim;
2:00 PM
CONT...

Young Jin Yoon
Failure to establish the probable validity of the real property claim; and
A showing that adequate relief can be secured to the claimant by the giving of an undertaking.

Chapter 7

43 Cal. Jur. 3d Lis Pendens § 7.
Park challenges the lis pendens filed by Plaintiff on the grounds that (1) the Plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence the probable validity of a real property claim on which the notice of lis pendens is based; and (2) the lis pendens does not contain a real property claim.

In her response, the Plaintiff submitted evidence in the form of her own declaration and from a portion of a transcript from a 2004 examination of the Defendants. The evidence supports the Plaintiff’s allegations that Park paid no consideration to his parents for title to the Property and that Park’s parents made payments towards the mortgage and possibly other expenses of the Property while their son was away in the Navy. The Plaintiff’s evidence is sufficient to overcome the first argument of Park.

Second, the Court finds persuasive Plaintiff’s legal authority from the Supreme Court of California indicating that a fraudulent transfer claim which seeks to void a transfer of real property affects the title to or possession of real property such that it constitutes a real property claim for purposes of the California lis pendens statutes. Kirkeby v. Superior Court, 33 Cal. 4th 642, 649, 93 P.3d 395, 400 (2004).
Here, the Complaint does not specifically allege a cause of action under California Civil Code § 3439.07 which was the operative claim in the Kirkeby case. Nonetheless, the Complaint does seek to void the transfer of the Property to Park as a remedy for the Fourth Claim of Relief. Based on the relief sought, given that Park has not sought to dismiss this claim, and has failed to file any reply to the Opposition, the Kirkeby holding is controlling on this issue.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Debtor(s):

Young Jin Yoon

Party Information

Chapter 7
Young Jin Yoon Represented By Ji Yoon Kim
Defendant(s):
Young Jin Yoon Represented By Ji Yoon Kim
Hyun Myung Park Represented By Ji Yoon Kim
Joshua Park Represented By
Ji Yoon Kim
Movant(s):
Joshua Park Represented By
Ji Yoon Kim Ji Yoon Kim Ji Yoon Kim
Joshua Park Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Vivian Kim Represented By
Jiyoung Kym
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:18-15107

Jesus Davila Romero

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01203 Frealy v. Davila et al

#16.00 Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01203. Complaint by Todd Frealy against Lorena Davila, Jesse L. Davila, Jesus Davila Romero. (Charge To Estate $350.00). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: 91- Declaratory judgment, 11- Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of property, 31- Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - 363(h)

EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Jesus Davila Romero Represented By Neil R Hedtke
Defendant(s):
Lorena Davila Pro Se
Jesse L. Davila Pro Se
Jesus Davila Romero Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Todd Frealy Represented By
Carmela Pagay
Trustee(s):
Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Carmela Pagay
2:00 PM
6:18-12027

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01156 Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Williams et al

#17.00 CONT Motion for Default Judgment Against Defendants Amy Williams and Richard M. Thomas, Jr

From: 11/7/18 Also #18
EH

Docket 13
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/30/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard M. Thomas Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Defendant(s):
Amy Williams Represented By Anerio V Altman
Richard M Thomas Jr. Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Raquel Young Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Movant(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
6:18-12027

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01156 Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Williams et al

#18.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01156. Complaint by Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee against Amy Williams, Richard M Thomas Jr.. (Charge To Estate) ($350.00). Complaint to: (1) Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer; (2) Obtain Declaratory Relief as to Ownership of Real Property; and (3) Authorize Sale of Property Owned in Part by Non-Debtor Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer))

From: 9/26/18, 11/7/18 Also #17
EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/30/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard M. Thomas Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Defendant(s):
Amy Williams Represented By Anerio V Altman
Richard M Thomas Jr. Pro Se
Joint Debtor(s):
Raquel Young Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard M. Thomas

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Karl T. Anderson, Chapter 7 Trustee Represented By
Frank X Ruggier
Trustee(s):
Karl T Anderson (TR) Represented By Larry D Simons Frank X Ruggier
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#19.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State A Claim EH
Docket 37

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Mina Farah Represented By
Wayne W Suojanen
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#20.00 Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State A Claim EH
Docket 35

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Defendant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Joint Debtor(s):
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Movant(s):
Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland
Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland Thomas F Nowland
2:00 PM
CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Anis Khalil Represented By
Wayne W Suojanen
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello
2:00 PM
6:17-19647

Sean Karadas

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:18-01123 First Home Bank v. Karadas

#21.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01123. Complaint by First Home Bank against Sean Karadas. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e))),(72 (Injunctive relief - other))(Kastan, Joshua)

From: 7/25/18, 10/24/18, 11/14/18 EH
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: JUDGMENT ENTERED 12/06/2018
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sean Karadas Represented By Todd L Turoci
Defendant(s):
Sean Karadas Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
First Home Bank Represented By Joshua N Kastan
Trustee(s):
Charles W Daff (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe
Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:14-01248 Revere Financial Corporation, a California corpora v. Roger, MD

#22.00 CONT Motion by Revere Financial Corporation and Receiver Jerry Wang to Strike Affirmative Defenses in Answer by Douglas J. Roger to First Amended Complaint by Revere Financial Corporation and Receiver Jerry Wang

From: 11/28/18 EH
Docket 133
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/16/19 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Douglas J Roger MD Represented By Summer M Shaw Thomas J Eastmond Marc C Forsythe
Movant(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation, a Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Jerry Wang Represented By
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Anthony J Napolitano

Chapter 7
A. Cisneros Represented By
Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#23.00 CONT Motion for Protective Order Interested Parties Douglas J. Roger And Nicole L. Ebarbs Notice Of Motion And Motion For Protective Order Pursuant To Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Rules 26(c) and 45

From: 11/28/18 Also #24
EH

Docket 93

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Douglas J. Roger and Nicole L. Represented By Marc C Forsythe
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#24.00 CONT Motion to Quash Modify and/or for a Protective Order re Subpoenas served on Citizens Business Bank, MUFG Union Bank, and Bank of Southern California by Plaintiff

From: 11/28/18 Also #23
EH

Docket 95

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Movant(s):
Liberty Orthopedic Corporation Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
Universal Orthopaedic Group Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
OIC Medical Corporation Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#25.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement filed by Liberty Orthopedic Corporation

From: 11/14/18 Also #26 - #28
EH

Docket 98
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#26.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted filed by OIC Medical Corporation

From: 11/14/18 Also #25 - #28
EH

Docket 99
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#27.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement Universal Orthopaedic Group

From: 11/14/18 Also #25 - #28
EH

Docket 97
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#28.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by
A. Cisneros against OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC CORPORATION, a California corporation, UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP, a California corporation. (Charge To Estate $350). for Avoidance, Recovery, and Preservation of Preferential and Fraudulent Transfers (with Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet) Nature of Suit: (12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18, 8/22/18, 10/31/18,
11/14/18

Also #25 - #27

EH

Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 12/19/18 AT 2:00 P.M.
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover
Defendant(s):
OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By
Misty A Perry Isaacson
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By
Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson
Plaintiff(s):
A. Cisneros Represented By
D Edward Hays Chad V Haes
Trustee(s):
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes
D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr
Los Angeles
Judge Mark Houle, Presiding Courtroom 1645 Calendar

Friday, December 14, 2018
Hearing Room
1645

11:00 AM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:16-01163 Revere Financial Corporation v. Burns

#1.00 Motion for Protective Order EH
Docket 117
Debtor(s):
*** VACATED *** REASON: FINAL STIPULATION TO BE FILED
Party Information
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Defendant(s):
Don Cameron Burns Represented By Don C Burns
Plaintiff(s):
Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
10:00 AM
6:13-20227

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13

#1.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 14954 GLASGOW COURT,
Victorville, CA, 92394 Under 11 U.S.C. § 362
(HOLDING DATE)

MOVANT: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC dba MR. COOPER

From: 11/13/18 EH
Docket 133

Tentative Ruling:
11/13/18
Service: Proper Opposition: YES

Debtors dispute that they are behind 9 payments and request a 30-day continuance to establish the payment history.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
James Robert Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
Joint Debtor(s):
Stephanie Mae Kinney Represented By John F Brady Lisa H Robinson
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

James Robert Kinney and Stephanie Mae Kinney

Chapter 13
Nationstar Mortgage LLC d/b/a Mr. Represented By
Dane W Exnowski
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:14-23079

Anita M. Williams

Chapter 13

#2.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 34150 Harrow Hill Rd, Wildomar, CA 92595

MOVANT: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 86

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Anita M. Williams Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft
Movant(s):
Navy Federal Credit Union Represented By Katelyn R Knapp Brandye N Foreman Christina J O
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:14-24553

Brooks L Sternberg and Angela Caldero

Chapter 13

#3.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 10866 Deer Canyon Dr, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91737

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

EH

Docket 68

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Brooks L Sternberg Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Joint Debtor(s):
Angela Caldero Represented By Julie J Villalobos
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Represented By
Dane W Exnowski
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Brooks L Sternberg and Angela Caldero

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-13830

Ramon Urrutia

Chapter 13

#4.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 15305 Mesquite Drive Lake Elsinore, CA 92530

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST

EH

Docket 56

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Ramon Urrutia Represented By
C Scott Rudibaugh
Movant(s):
Deutsche Bank National Trust Represented By Bonni S Mantovani
Diana Torres-Brito
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:15-20006

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13

#5.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 483 Grapevine Dr, Corona CA 92882

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS From: 4/24/18, 5/29/18, 7/31/18, 10/30/18
EH

Docket 55

Tentative Ruling:
Hearing Date: 4/24/18 Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

GRANT Movant leave to offer/provide/enter into a potential forbearance, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan workout. Request for APO is DENIED as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carl J Charlot Represented By
Michael A Younge
Joint Debtor(s):
Jacinta S Charlot Represented By Michael A Younge
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Carl J Charlot and Jacinta S Charlot

Chapter 13
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Represented By April Harriott Seth Greenhill Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-14908

Joan Eleanor Demiany

Chapter 13

#6.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 1055 East Via Colusa, Palm Springs, CA 92262

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

From: 9/11/18, 10/30/18 EH
Docket 35
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/5/19 AT 10:00 A.M.
Tentative Ruling:
10/30/2018

The Movant submitted evidence that the Debtor is delinquent in the amount of
$30,303.59, having missed 10 postconfirmation payments. The parties stipulated toa continuance of the hearing from September 11, 2018 to this date. The primary basis of opposition appears to be regarding the status of a loan modification application.
Parties to update the Court.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joan Eleanor Demiany Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw
Movant(s):
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-15740

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13

#7.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 22424 Tanager Street, Grand Terrace, CA 92313

MOVANT: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

CASE DISMISSED 11/8/18

From: 6/6/18, 9/11/18, 10/30/18 EH
Docket 59
Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING:
09/11/18
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT request for relief from the co-debtor stay. GRANT request under ¶ 3 permitting Movant to offer Debtor loan workout options; and GRANT order designating Debtor as "borrower" under Cal. Civil Code § 2920.5. DENY request pursuant to § 362(d)(2) for lack of cause shown and DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Mark Gehrig Represented By
Todd L Turoci
10:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Mark Gehrig

Chapter 13
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL Represented By
Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-17402

Thomas Lee Abercrombie and Rebecca Anne Abercrombie

Chapter 13

#8.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2013 Ford Escape; VIN: 1FMCU0H93DUD72995

MOVANT: ALTA VISTA CREDIT UNION

From: 9/11/18, 11/13/18 EH
Docket 44
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/6/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Thomas Lee Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Joint Debtor(s):
Rebecca Anne Abercrombie Represented By
Rabin J Pournazarian
Movant(s):
Alta Vista Credit Union Represented By
Bruce P. Needleman
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-18720

Patricia Morales

Chapter 13

#9.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 916 Sperry Dr, Colton, CA 92324

MOVANT: SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING LLC

EH

Docket 44
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Patricia Morales Represented By Dana Travis
Movant(s):
Specialized Loan Servicing LLC Represented By
Erin M McCartney
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:17-19291

Carolyn Maxine Bodden

Chapter 13

#10.00 CONT Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: for property located at 370 Claremont St Hemet, CA 92545

MOVANT: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION From: 10/16/18, 11/6/18, 11/27/18
EH

Docket 30
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
10/16/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: Yes
Parties to apprise Court of status of arrears. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carolyn Maxine Bodden Represented By Edward G Topolski
Movant(s):
U.S. Bank National Association Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-10079

Cheryl Linda Fernandez

Chapter 13

#11.00 CONT Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 425 Grant Street, Redlands, California 92373

MOVANT: WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB

From: 11/27/18 EH
Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018

Service is Proper Opposition: None

The Court is inclined to GRANT relief from the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) (1). GRANT waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for relief from § 1301(a) stay because Movant has failed to serve the co-debtor at the address identified in Schedule H. GRANT requests under ¶¶ 2 and 3. DENY alternative request under ¶ 13 as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Cheryl Linda Fernandez Represented By Matthew D. Resnik
Movant(s):
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Represented By
Kelsey X Luu
10:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Cheryl Linda Fernandez

Jamie D Hanawalt Gilbert R Yabes

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-11128

Gilbert D Olivares

Chapter 13

#12.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 34112 Silk Tassel Road, Lake Elsinore, CA 92532

MOVANT: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 41
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/11/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Gilbert D Olivares Represented By Scott Kosner
Movant(s):
Freedom Mortgage Corporation Represented By Nancy L Lee
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15766

Deborah A Neville and Ronnie L Neville

Chapter 13

#13.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Nissan Altima, VIN: 1N4AL3AP0GC233657

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC

EH

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Deborah A Neville Represented By Hayk Grigoryan
Joint Debtor(s):
Ronnie L Neville Represented By Hayk Grigoryan
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Jennifer H Wang
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Deborah A Neville and Ronnie L Neville

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-15977

John Arquillano and Janet Arquillano

Chapter 13

#14.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2018 HONDA ACCORD, VIN: 1HGC V1F1 3JA0 74451

MOVANT: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 28

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
John Arquillano Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Janet Arquillano Represented By Andrew Nguyen
Movant(s):
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE Represented By
Vincent V Frounjian
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

John Arquillano and Janet Arquillano

Chapter 13
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17158

Dean Gregory Haidl

Chapter 7

#15.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2014 Ford F250, VIN 1FT7W2BT9EEA48218

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

EH

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Dean Gregory Haidl Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
Sheryl K Ith
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17498

Christopher T. Seelig and Jamie H. Seelig

Chapter 7

#16.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 Dodge Durango, VIN 1C4SDJCT4FC906779

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Christopher T. Seelig Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Joint Debtor(s):
Jamie H. Seelig Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Movant(s):
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. dba Wells Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Christopher T. Seelig and Jamie H. Seelig

Chapter 7
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17605

Joseph N Duguay, II

Chapter 13

#17.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 Jeep Wrangler-VIN: 1C4BJWDG0CL117046

MOVANT: ONTARIO-MONTCLAIR SCHOOL EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

EH

Docket 26
*** VACATED *** REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/30/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joseph N Duguay II Represented By Andy C Warshaw
Movant(s):
Ontario-Montclair School Represented By
Bruce P. Needleman
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-17663

Stephen Richard Morales and Diane Forniss Morales

Chapter 7

#18.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 NISSAN ALTIMA, VIN # 1N4AL3AP1HC489503

MOVANT: NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Stephen Richard Morales Represented By Todd L Turoci
Joint Debtor(s):
Diane Forniss Morales Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE Represented By
Michael D Vanlochem
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Stephen Richard Morales and Diane Forniss Morales

Chapter 7
Karl T Anderson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18344

Adrien Liets and Marine Lazaro Liets

Chapter 7

#19.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ford F150, VIN: 1FTEW1CP0GKF85034

MOVANT: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY LLC

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Adrien Liets Represented By
Melissa A Raskey
Joint Debtor(s):
Marine Lazaro Liets Represented By Melissa A Raskey
Movant(s):
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Adrien Liets and Marine Lazaro Liets

Chapter 7
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18563

Rosa Esmeralda Macias

Chapter 7

#20.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 49188 Pluma Gris Place, Coachella, California 92236

MOVANT: WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

EH

Docket 19

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service: Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT as to ¶3 of prayer for relief. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Rosa Esmeralda Macias Represented By Stephen L Burton
Movant(s):
Wilmington Trust, National Represented By Sean C Ferry
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-18815

Steven Michel McCann

Chapter 13

#21.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Confirming Termination of Stay under 11
U.S.C. 362(j) or That No Stay is in Effect under 11 U.S.C. 362(c)(4)(A)(ii) MOVANT: ORANGE COUNTYS CREDIT UNION
EH

Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service was proper and no opposition has been filed.

The Movant has correctly indicated that the Debtor has had a prior case pending and dismissed within one year of the instant filing. Pursuant to § 362(c)(3), having failed to seek to extend the stay during the 30-day period following the petition date of October 17, 2018, the automatic stay has terminated by operation of law. The Motion is GRANTED.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Steven Michel McCann Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo
Movant(s):
Orange Countys Credit Union Represented By Mirco J Haag
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19075

Dan Henley Galey and Buenaflor Sabino Galey

Chapter 7

#22.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 Toyota Corolla, VIN 5YFBURHE6HP588411

MOVANT: SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.

EH

Docket 11

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Dan Henley Galey Represented By Carey C Pickford
Joint Debtor(s):
Buenaflor Sabino Galey Represented By Carey C Pickford
Movant(s):
Santander Consumer USA Inc. Represented By Sheryl K Ith
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Dan Henley Galey and Buenaflor Sabino Galey

Chapter 7
Arturo Cisneros (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19168

Jasmine Keshawn Jennings

Chapter 7

#23.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 14084 Catalina Ct., Fontana CA 92336

MOVANT: CHUN CHUN WEN

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for order confirming that no stay is in effect for lack of cause shown. GRANT request for annulment of the stay to validate Movant’s postpetition acts.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jasmine Keshawn Jennings Pro Se
Movant(s):
Chun Wen Represented By
Luke P Daniels
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19177

Paula Jean Campbell

Chapter 7

#24.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Ford Escape, VIN: 1FMCU0GX8GUB24231

MOVANT: CAB WEST LLC

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/18
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Paula Jean Campbell Represented By
Diane M Singleton-Smith
Movant(s):
Cab West, LLC Represented By Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
John P Pringle (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19183

Carmen Lynn Chilson

Chapter 13

#25.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 755 Casey Cir Banning, CA 92220

MOVANT: GENOVEVA CAMPA

EH

Docket 22
*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/17/18
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Carmen Lynn Chilson Represented By Steven A Alpert
Movant(s):
Genoveva U Campa Represented By Barry L O'Connor
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19276

Efrain Cortez

Chapter 7

#26.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Dodge Ram 1500, VIN: 1C6RR7TT2GS321040

MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE LLC

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Efrain Cortez Represented By
Kevin M Cortright
Movant(s):
TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19465

Joseph F. Mark

Chapter 13

#27.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2007 BMW 750Li, VIN: WBAH N835 17DT 75132

MOVANT: MECHANICS BANK

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Joseph F. Mark Represented By Keith Q Nguyen
Movant(s):
MECHANICS BANK Represented By Vincent V Frounjian
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19486

Jacqueline Williams

Chapter 13

#28.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 12878 Merry Meadows Drive, Eastvale aka Corona CA

MOVANT: WILLIAM SMITH AND MONICA SMITH

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None
GRANT relief from the stay under § 362(d)(1). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jacqueline Williams Represented By Marjan Alitalaei
Movant(s):
William & Monica Smith Represented By Helen G Long
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19532

Jose F Mejia

Chapter 13

#29.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations REAL PROPERTY RE: 26458 Twin Pines Street, Menifee, California 92584-4927

MOVANT: WELLS FARGO BANK NA

CASE DISMISSED 11/27/18

EH

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(4). Court finds that bankruptcy case was part of a scheme to hinder, delay and defraud creditors based on multiple bankruptcy filings affecting this property. The Court finds bad faith as to the Debtor. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. GRANT pursuant to ¶ 3 and relief from co-debtor stay. DENY request for APO as moot.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jose F Mejia Pro Se
Movant(s):
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Represented By Gilbert R Yabes
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19605

Demar Austin Browning and Nunia Naavavau Foaki Otuafi

Chapter 7

#30.00 Motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2012 HONDA ODYSSEY, VIN: 5FNR L5H9 5CB1 03161

MOVANT: AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Movant to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Demar Austin Browning Represented By Fred Edwards
Joint Debtor(s):
Nunia Naavavau Foaki Otuafi Represented By Fred Edwards
Movant(s):
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE Represented By
Vincent V Frounjian
10:00 AM
CONT...
Trustee(s):

Demar Austin Browning and Nunia Naavavau Foaki Otuafi

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19792

Biani Berlenda Mora

Chapter 13

#31.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 12648 Casa Bonita Place Victorville, CA 92392

MOVANT: BIANI BERLENDA MORA

EH

Docket 8

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018

The Debtor’s prior case was dismissed for a failure to make plan payments. The Debtor explains that the shortfall was due to an unexpected dip in the payments from social security that Debtor was receiving. Debtor’s new Schedule I shows substantially increased payments from social security. However, the Declaration of the Debtor provides insufficient detail to explain why the prior benefit payments stopped and why the current benefits have increased so significantly.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Biani Berlenda Mora Represented By Steven A Alpert
Movant(s):
Biani Berlenda Mora Represented By Steven A Alpert
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19841

Jorge Lino Madrigal

Chapter 13

#32.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property

MOVANT: JORGE LINO MADRIGAL

CASE DISMISSED 12/17/18

EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018

The Debtor’s prior case was dismissed on September 12, 2018, in the Southern District of California. The Southern District’s docket indicates that the dismissal resulted from Debtor’s failure to appear and testify at the 341 Meeting of Creditors. The case was filed by the Debtor in pro per. In his declaration, the Debtor asserts that he is a "lay person", was not able to attend his 341 Meeting and did not realize that the meeting could not be postponed.

As to this issue, the Court finds that by hiring counsel to assist him with understanding the duties of a debtor filing chapter 13, the Debtor has shown cause to extend the stay.

However, as to ‘Mr. Cooper’ (aka Nationstar), the Debtor has failed to properly serve Nationstar pursuant to FRBP 7004. Specifically, Rule 7004 requires that Nationstar be served to the attention of an officer. Although, the address served appears valid and the Court believes Nationstar likely accepts service using its new dba Mr. Cooper, the Motion was not served on an officer. Additionally, Nationstar/Mr. Cooper was not identified in ¶1 of the Notice of Motion as required by the form motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
10:00 AM
CONT...
Debtor(s):

Jorge Lino Madrigal

Chapter 13
Jorge Lino Madrigal Represented By Gary S Saunders
Movant(s):
Jorge Lino Madrigal Represented By Gary S Saunders
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19883

Lucy D Aguilar

Chapter 13

#33.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 2198 Arden Circle, Corona, CA 92882

MOVANT: SAMI RUSTOM

EH

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
Service is Proper Opposition: None

GRANT relief from the stay under §§ 362(d)(1) and (d)(2). GRANT requests under ¶¶ 7, 9 and 11. GRANT waiver of 4001(a)(3) stay. DENY request for order confirming no stay in effect for lack of cause shown.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lucy D Aguilar Pro Se
Movant(s):
SAMI RUSTOM Represented By Shazad Z Omar
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19894

Noemi Meraz Espinoza

Chapter 13

#34.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 7569 Marilyn Dr., Corona, CA

MOVANT: NOEMI MERAZ ESPINOZA

EH

Docket 15

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018

Debtor filed her prior case in pro per and had her case dismissed for failure to file information. The Debtor asserts the dismissal resulted from her taking ‘bad advice’ from a party that advised her to file a skeletal petition to save her house. The Debtor has now retained counsel to assist her in her efforts to propose a chapter 13 plan.
Based on the Debtor’s retention of counsel to assist her in understanding the duties of a chapter 13 debtor, the Court finds that the Debtor has overcome the presumption that the case was not filed in good faith. The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Noemi Meraz Espinoza Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Movant(s):
Noemi Meraz Espinoza Represented By
Ramiro Flores Munoz
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
10:00 AM
6:18-19965

Jorge Manuel Azmitia and Yoshiko Azmitia

Chapter 13

#35.00 Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 18057 Longhorn Ln, Chino Hills, CA 91709

MOVANT: JORGE M AZMITIA AND YOSHIKO AZMITIA

EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
The Debtors were at least one month delinquent when the case was dismissed on October 25, 2018. At the hearing on the Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss the Debtors could not provide assurances they would cure the arrears.

The Debtors’ declaration asserts that the Debtors fell behind on plan payments because they had to ‘divert resources’ to deal with a death in the family at around the same time that the Debtor Husband was involved in a car accident. The declaration is devoid of any detail as to the expenses they incurred or how specifically these events caused them to fall behind. Given the failure to perform the terms of their prior chapter 13 plan, the burden on the Debtors to overcome the presumption that the instant case was not filed in good faith require clear and convincing evidence. 11 USC
§ 362(c)(3). The declaration falls short. The Court is inclined to DENY the Motion.

Finally, based on the proof of service, it appears that SPS, the servicer of the Debtors’ mortgage loan on their primary residence, was not served via Rule 7004 in that it was not served to the attention of an officer, to an address appropriate for service of process, or by certified mail.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By
10:00 AM
CONT...

Jorge Manuel Azmitia and Yoshiko Azmitia
Nicholas M Wajda

Chapter 13
Joint Debtor(s):
Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Movant(s):
Jorge Manuel Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda
Yoshiko Azmitia Represented By Nicholas M Wajda Nicholas M Wajda
Trustee(s):
Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se
2:00 PM
6:17-15717

AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp.

Chapter 11

#36.00 Post Confirmation Status Conference EH
Docket 161

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
AMJ Plumbing Specialists Corp. Represented By
David Lozano
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#37.00 CONT Application for Compensation and Notice of Hearing with Proof of Service for Todd L Turoci, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 12/2/2017 to 9/17/2018, Fee:
$164280.00, Expenses: $7207.77. (Turoci, Todd)
(HOLDING DATE)

From: 10/16/18, 10/30/18, 12/4/18 Also #38
EH

Docket 414

Tentative Ruling:
12/04/2018

Given the current stage of the chapter 11 proceeding, and finding that action by the Debtor to conclude the case remains outstanding, the Court is inclined to CONTINUE the instant fee application for a short time period to permit the Debtor an opporutnity to file its request for dismissal and/or to otherwise outline a plan for concluding the case.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
Movant(s):
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
2:00 PM
6:17-19936

Auto Strap Transport, LLC

Chapter 11

#38.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 1/9/18, 4/10/18, 7/10/18, 7/24/18, 8/14/18, 10/30/18, 12/4/18

Also #37 EH
Docket 48

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Auto Strap Transport, LLC Represented By Todd L Turoci
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#39.00 Motion for relief from automatic stay with supporting declarations ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM RE: JUAN CATANO v. G HURTADO
CONSTRUCTION, INC.. filed by Creditor Juan Catano, Creditor Faustino Magana, Creditor Donahoo & Associates, PC

MOVANT: JUAN CATANO, FAUSTINO MAGANA, DONAHOO & ASSOCIATES

Also #40 & #41 EH
Docket 113

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
Donahoo & Associates, PC Represented By Richard E Donahoo
Faustino Magana Represented By Richard E Donahoo
Juan Catano Represented By
Richard E Donahoo
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#40.00 CONT Motion for approval of chapter 11 disclosure statement From: 9/11/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18, 11/6/18
Also #39 & #41 EH
Docket 45

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
Movant(s):
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
2:00 PM
6:18-12807

G Hurtado Construction, Inc.

Chapter 11

#41.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 5/8/18, 8/21/18, 9/11/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18, 11/6/18

Also #39 & #40 EH
Docket 18

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
G Hurtado Construction, Inc. Represented By Michael Jones Sara Tidd
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#42.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case From: 9/25/18, 10/1/18, 12/4/18
Also #43 & #44 EH
Docket 37
Tentative Ruling:
9/25/2018
BACKGROUND

On July 23, 2018, Richard Garavito ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. Debtor previously filed a Chapter 13 case on April 17, 2018, which was dismissed on July 19, 2018.

On August 29, 2018, the Taylor Family Trust of June 16, 2004 ("Creditor"), the primary creditor in the instant case, filed a motion to confirm that the automatic stay terminated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A). On September 7, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to continue/impose the automatic stay. Because Debtor has not offered a cognizable legal argument as to why the automatic stay has not terminated, or why Debtor can obtain a continuation of the automatic stay after the statutory deadline, the Court has posted tentative rulings indicating that it intends to grant Creditor’s motion and deny Debtor’s motion.

On September 11, 2018, Debtor filed a motion to dismiss the case and an application
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11
shortening time. On September 13, 2018, the Court approved the application shortening time, and set a hearing for September 25, 2018.

DISCUSSION

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(1) states:

Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection (c), on request of a party in interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause unless the court determines that the appointment under section 1104(a) of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.

11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4) provides a non-exclusive list of sixteen examples of cause – most of which are more appropriately considered when the moving party is an entity other than the debtor.

Here, Debtor’s motion is unclear, at best. The entire argument why the case should be dismissed is reproduced, verbatim, as follows:

In the present case, since the motion to impose and/or continue the stay was not timely filed, the stay will no longer be in effect with the pending motion to terminate the stay filed by secured creditor Taylor Family Trust.

The Debtor should not be penalized due to counsel’s inadvertent calendaring
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11
error of the 30 days rule of filing a motion to impose and/or continue the stay. However, an argument can be made that under the majority approach a motion to impose or continue the stay shall be filed as to the Debtor individually and not as to the property of the estate. Here, the Subject Property is property of the estate and the automatic stay should be in effect as to the Subject Property.

However, due to circumstances surrounding the possible termination of the stay, the Debtor requests dismissal of this case as there is no purpose if the stay is not in effect as to the Subject Property.

[Dkt. No. 37, pg. 5]. In summary, Debtor acknowledges that the stay has statutorily terminated and the deadline to continue the automatic stay has lapsed, but then argues that such stay termination is with regards to the Debtor only, not property of the estate. Despite the argument, the Debtor then asserts that due to "circumstances" the Debtor requests dismissal because there is "no purpose" if the stay has also terminated as to property of the estate.

There are multiple issues with the above line of argument. First, Debtor does not appear to have raised any coherent cause for dismissal – the only argument made in favor of dismissal, that the "Subject Property" is not protected by the automatic stay, (and thus this Chapter 11 case cannot be successful) is also explicitly rejected by Debtor. Second, § 1112(b) requires the Court to consider whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 is in the best interests of creditors and the estate. Here, Debtor’s schedules filed in the instant case indicate that all creditors would likely be paid in full if this case was converted to Chapter 7. Therefore, pursuant to the analysis required by § 1112(b), it is unclear why this case would be dismissed rather than converted to Chapter 7.

Finally, the Court acknowledges that, in a reply relating to its motion to confirm that the automatic stay has terminated, Creditor has requested that, if the case is dismissed, Debtor be restricted from re-filing by a bar. While raising this argument in a reply relating to a different motion is procedurally improper, the Court need not address the request at the current time given the issues above.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

TENTATIVE RULING

Debtor and Creditor to argue: (1) whether there is cause for dismissal; (2) whether the automatic stay is in effect as to the Subject Property; and (3) whether dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 would be in the best interests of creditors.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
Movant(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#43.00 CONT Amended Motion (related document(s): 30 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 5065 Brooks Street, Montclair, Ca 91763 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay

MOVANT: RICHARD GARAVITO

From: 12/4/18 Also #42 & #44 EH
Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
Movant(s):
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16149

Richard Garavito

Chapter 11

#44.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/21/18, 10/16/18, 12/4/18 Also #42 & #43
EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Richard Garavito Represented By Tamar Terzian
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#45.00 CONT Motion To Compel Payment Of Administrative Rent Or Immediate Rejection Of Lease And Related Relief

From: 11/27/18 Also #46
EH

Docket 194
Tentative Ruling:
12/18/2018
BACKGROUND
On August 15, 2018, Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition. On November 2, 2018, The H.N. and Frances C. Berger Foundation ("Berger Foundation") filed its motion to compel payment of administrative rent or immediate rejection of lease and related relief. On November 13, 2018, Debtor filed its opposition.
The subject of the motion is a lease dated August 15, 2008, for certain nonresidential real property located in Palm Desert, California. According to Berger Foundation, "[p] ursuant to the terms of lease, should the Debtor continue to occupy the premises after August 14, 2018, the lease obligation increases to approximately $91,216.50 per month," [Dkt. No. 194, pg. 2] a doubling of the contractual monthly rental obligation. Berger Foundation requests: (1) that Debtor be compelled to cure the default on the lease or surrender the premises; and (2) allowance of an administrative expense claim in the amount of $3,040.55 per day.
2:00 PM
CONT...
Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties
Chapter 11

Debtor’s opposition argues that: (1) the lease cannot be assumed or rejected because the lease expired the day before the petition date; and (2) because the lease expired prepetition, the legal basis for the requested administrative expense claim is invalid.

On November 27, 2018, the Court held a hearing on the matter, and ultimately continued the hearing for supplemental briefing. On December 4, 2018, Debtor filed its supplemental opposition. On December 11, 2018, Berger Foundation filed its supplemental reply.

DISCUSSION

The critical legal question at issue is whether the operative lease expired prepetition. Berger Foundation relies on 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3) as the basis for both its requests, and that provision states:

The trustee shall timely perform all the obligations of the debtor, except those specified in section 365(b)(2), arising from and after the order for relief under any unexpired lease of nonresidential real property, until such lease is assumed or rejected, notwithstanding section 503(b)(1) of this title. The court may extend, for cause, the time for performance of any such obligation that arises within 60 days after the date of the order for relief, but the time for performance shall not be extended beyond such 60-day period. This subsection shall not be deemed to affect the trustee’s obligations under the provisions of subsection (b) or (f) of the section. Acceptance of any such performance does not constitute waiver or relinquishment of the lessor’s rights under such lease or under this title.

(emphasis added).
2:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

As a general rule, an expired lease is no longer executory, and, therefore, is no longer assumable, if the lease expired prepetition. See, e.g., In re Acorn Invs., 8 B.R. 506, 509-10 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1981). Therefore, the Court must determine whether the lease at issue expired prepetition. See Robinson v. Chicago Hous. Auth., 54 F.3d 316, 320 (7th Cir. 1995) ("the federal law allowing ‘unexpired’ leases to be assumed calls for a determination whether a lease has ended under state law."). Here, Debtor argues that the lease expired pre-petition, resulting in a holdover tenancy, in which no privity of contract exists, while Berger Foundation argues that the lease became a month to month tenancy and, therefore, was not expired. While the parties appear to be agree on the operative legal standard, the parties disagree regarding how that standard applies to the facts here

Both parties refer to CAL. CIV. CODE § 1945, which states:

If a lessee of real property remains in possession thereof after the expiration of the hiring, and the lessor accepts rent from him, the parties are presumed to have renewed the hiring on the same terms and for the same time, not exceeding one month when the rent is payable monthly, nor in any case one year.

As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that it appears the above legal provision should not actually be applicable to the instant situation. Specifically, CAL. CIV. CODE
§ 1940(a), (c) states the following:
1. Except as provided in subdivision (b), this chapter shall apply to all persons who hire dwelling units located within this state included tenants, boarders, lodgers, and others, however denominated.
(c) "Dwelling unit" means a structure or the part of a structure that is used as a home, residence, or sleeping place by one person who maintains a household or by two or more persons who maintain a common household.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

Here, the lease at issue was a commercial lease which would remove the lease from the purview of § 1945 based upon the plain language of § 1940. Nevertheless, the Court notes that there is ample caselaw, some of which is cited by the parties, in which California courts have applied § 1945 to commercial property. Although it is not clear to this Court why that section is inapplicable to the instant situation, the Court will defer to the state law courts on this issue of state law.

Ultimately, the argument of Berger Foundation boils down to the following:

In this case, after the expiration of the Lease terms (August 14, 2018), Debtor continued to occupy the Premises. Berger continued to accept the Debtor as a tenant and took no action to terminate the Debtor’s leasehold interest in the Premises. To the contrary, as this Court’s record reflects, from the outset, Berger has been focusing on receiving rent payments and, in fact, received post-petition payments of not less than $15,000 as of the date of this Reply. Clearly, pursuant to Civil Code § 1945 and applicable California authority, the Lease converted to a month-to-month tenancy after August 14, 2018.

[Dkt. No. 278, pg. 3]. Debtor’s argument, on the other hand, appears to be that Berger Foundation’s actions in this case simply do not reflect clear consent to Debtor’s continued possession of the premises.

First, there appears to be a timing issue which has not been identified by the parties. The operative lease expired, by its own terms, on August 14, 2018. The instant bankruptcy was filed on August 15, 2018. Therefore, assuming, arguendo, that rent was paid and accepted in a matter which would trigger the statutory presumption in CAL. CIV. CODE § 1945, such event would have occurred after the petition date. City v. Hart, 175 Cal. App. 3d 92, 94 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985) ("The statute provides the landlord’s consent to the holding over is implied if he accepts rent from the tenant after the expiration of the lease. This consent to the holding over must be established before the statutory presumption of the same terms becomes effective."). Therefore,
2:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
the lease at issue would have been, as of the petition date, expired and not assumable. Quite simply, on the record before the Court, it is implausible that Berger Foundation could have undertaken any action in the fraction of the day before the instant bankruptcy filing which would have indicated consent to the creation of a month-to- month tenancy.

Furthermore, outside of the bankruptcy law issues raised above, Berger Foundation’s position does not seem to be compatible with state law. Quite simply, the presumptions outlined in CAL. CIV. CODE § 1945 are analogous to contractual principles in common law. By remaining in possession of the property, and tendering a rental payment, a holdover tenant is making an offer; by accepting such tender, the landlord manifests his assent to such offer. Berger Foundation seems to be positing that the payment of any rent whatsoever, even a single dollar, subsequently accepted by the landlord, results in the extension of the lease terms on the original contractual terms.

Berger Foundation’s argument, however, is inconsistent with fundamental contractual principles, for in the case of a minimal rental payment, it cannot be said that either party has made an offer, accepted by the other party, to renew the original lease terms. At best, the landlord’s implied acquiescence may be construed as an offer, yet the tenant’s tender of a minimal rental payment can only be interpreted as a counter-offer, since such a tender would be materially inconsistent with the terms of the offer. If the landlord accepts this reduced tender, the terms agreed upon must be construed as those set forth in the counter-offer, a principle codified in CAL. CIV. PRO. § 2076:

The person to whom a tender is made must, at the time, specify any objection he may have to the money, instrument, or property, or he must be deemed to have waived it; and if the objection be to the amount of money, the terms of the instrument, or the amount or kind of property, he must specify the amount, terms, or kind which he requires, or be precluded from objecting afterwards.

See also Taylor v. Taylor, 39 Cal. App. 2d 518, 521 (Cal. Ct. App. 1940) ("It is now settled by these cases that where the tenant tenders, and the landlord accepts, as full payment of the rent, a less monthly rental than that reserved in the lease, he cannot later recover the unpaid balance of the rent reserved.")
2:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

While the above principle, a principle of estoppel, is properly subject to the Court’s consideration of equities, such consideration would simply not change the fact that a reduced monthly rental payment cannot be considered acquiescence to a renewal of the original contractual terms. In the absence of such mutual agreement to be bound to the original terms, there simply cannot be contractual privity.

Finally, the Court notes that the operation of CAL. CIV. CODE § 1945 is to create a rebuttable presumption that the least has been extended. Assuming, arguendo, that the bankruptcy and contract law issues noted above were not present, it appears probable that such a presumption would be rebutted in the instant case. The Court is not aware of any action taken by Debtor that would support a conclusion that Debtor intended to renew the lease on the original terms, and Berger Foundation has made repeated statements which would be incompatible with the presumption in § 1945. For instance, in the instant motion Berger Foundation made the following statements, which are implicitly and explicitly more compatible with a holdover tenancy than a month-to-month tenancy:

-"Since the filing of this case, the Debtor has continued, and continues, to occupy the Premises, yet has failed to pay the rental obligation due and owing." [Dkt. No 194, pg. 2 and 4]

-"Based on the fact that the Debtor remained as a holdover tenant, and pursuant to the terms of the Lease, the rental obligation increases to approximately $91,216.50 per month." [Dkt. No. 194, pg. 4 and 10] (emphasis added).

-"Here, the Debtor has made no payments while continuing to occupy the Premises." [Dkt. No. 194, pg. 6].

For the reasons outlined above, the Court concludes that the lease in question was expired as of the petition date because nothing in the record indicates that Berger Foundation provided consent to continued possession of the premises in the less than one-day period between the expiration of the lease and the instant bankruptcy filing. To the extent that Berger Foundation argues that postpetition acts retroactively
2:00 PM
CONT...

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
revived the original lease terms, such retroactive revival would seem to be incompatible with City v. Hart, 175 Cal. App. 3d 92, 94 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985). Furthermore, because Debtor did not remotely act in accordance with the original lease terms, it cannot be said that Debtor actions constituted a renewal of those terms; if any lease was entered into postpetition, it must have been on substantially different terms, which would require notice and a hearing. Additionally, even if the statutory presumption of CAL. CIV. CODE § 1945 were applicable in the instant situation, the Court concludes that such presumption would likely be rebutted based on the fact that Debtor did not act in accordance with the original terms, and based on Berger Foundation’s explicit characterization of Debtor as a holdover tenant.

The Court will not reach Berger Foundation’s contingent request for an administrative claim because the record before the Court would not permit the Court to engage in the analysis required by 11 U.S.C. § 503(b).

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to DENY the motion in its entirety.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
2:00 PM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11
The H. N. and Frances C. Berger Represented By
David B Golubchik
2:00 PM
6:18-16908

Visiting Nurse Association of the Inland Counties

Chapter 11

#46.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18, 10/30/18, 11/13/18

Also #45 EH
Docket 4

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Visiting Nurse Association of the Represented By
David M Goodrich Beth Gaschen Jennifer Vicente Ryan W Beall
2:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#47.00 Disclosure Statement for Chapter 11 Liquidating Plan Proposed by the Debtor Also #48 - #50
EH

Docket 124

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#48.00 Motion For Sale of Property of the Estate under Section 363(b) - No Fee and Subject to Overbids and a Break-Up Fee, Combined With Notice of Bidding Procedures and Request for Approval of the Bidding Procedures Utilized; and Granting Related Relief

Also #47- #50

EH

Docket 154

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#49.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 11/6/18 Also #47- #50
EH

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
3:00 PM
6:18-18339

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

#50.00 CONT Application to Employ Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP as General Bankruptcy Counsel

From: 11/27/18 Also #47- #49
EH

Docket 45
Tentative Ruling:
11/27/2018
DISCUSSION

"[I]t is clear that the bankruptcy court has broad discretion over the appointment of professionals." In re Seeburg Prods. Corp., 215 B.R. 175, 178 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1997). A violation of the rules of professional responsibility can be sufficient reason to disqualify a proposed counsel from being employed in a case. See, e.g.. In re Universal Bldg. Prods., 486 B.R. 650, 661 (Bankr. D. Del. 2010) (collecting cases).

"An attorney retained by the trustee, or debtor in possession, who assists with the collection of the assets of the estate, must abide by the highest professional standards." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 840 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1991) "Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is the standard of behavior." Meinhard v. Salmon, 164 N.E. 545, 546 (N.Y. 1928).

"[A] debtor who proposes a sale of all of its assets . . . must fully disclose to the court
3:00 PM
CONT...

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11
and creditors the relationship between the buyer and seller, as well as the circumstances under which the negotiations have taken place, any marketing efforts, and the factual basis upon which the debtor determined that the price was reasonable." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. at 842. In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., continued on to state:

The Court finds from the evidence before it that Ms. Bernstein either (1) knew of the collusive and undisclosed relationships in this case and knowingly participated in misleading the Court and creditors; or (2) didn’t know of the collusive and undisclosed relationships in this case, and is therefore wholly incompetent because she insisted on remaining ignorant of the facts and law applicable to her case notwithstanding the numerous indicia of questionable conduct along the way. Whether Ms. Bernstein’s acts were wrongful, willfully incompetent or grossly negligent is not important to the determination here.
Under either case, the Court concludes her fees must be denied in their entirely [sic], she should not be permitted to represent debtors in possession before any bankruptcy court, and her conduct in this case must be referred to the State Bar of California for disciplinary proceedings.

Id. at 847.

In the instant case, it appears Applicant failed to act with honesty and candor in relation to the sale of substantially all of the estate’s assets. Specifically, notwithstanding Applicant’s duty to the Court, Applicant failed to disclose a material side deal which was pertinent to the terms of the sale under review, and Applicant even stated at the hearing it was not Applicant’s job to make such disclosure.
Applicant’s conduct in this case has fallen short of complying with the rules of professional conduct and has obstructed the Court’s review of the primary matter in this case, the sale of substantially all of Debtor’s assets. Given that such conduct is clearly adequate to disallow Applicant’s fees in their entirety, the Court is inclined to find that authorizing the employment of Applicant would be a frivolous exercise.

TENTATIVE RULING
3:00 PM
CONT...

Technology Solutions & Services, Inc., a Californi

Chapter 11

The Court is inclined to DISALLOW the application.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
Movant(s):
Technology Solutions & Services, Represented By
Leonard M Shulman Melissa Davis Lowe
11:00 AM
6:13-30477

Master Design Inc

Chapter 7

#1.00 Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH
Docket 155
Tentative Ruling:

12/19/2018
No opposition has been filed. Service was Proper.

The applications for compensation of the Trustee and Accountant for the Trustee have been set for hearing on the notice required by LBR 2016-1. Pursuant to the Trustee's Final Report and the applications of the associated professionals, the Court is inclined to APPROVE the following administrative expenses:

Trustee Fees: $ 40,000.00 Trustee Expenses: $ 36.00

Accountant Fees:
$ 5,740.00
Accountant Costs:
$ 78.46
Court Costs:
$350.00

Franchise Tax Board: $1,724.79

APPEARANCES WAIVED. If written or oral opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued. Trustee to lodge order within 7 days.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Master Design Inc Represented By Eric M Sasahara
11:00 AM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Master Design Inc

John Y Kim

Chapter 7
Steven M Speier (TR) Represented By Robert P Goe Marc C Forsythe Donald Reid
11:00 AM
6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

#2.00 CONT Objection to Claim #17 by Revere Financial Corporation
(Holding date)

From: 10/1/14, 11/5/14, 12/3/14, 12/15/14, 1/28/15, 4/15/15, 7/22/15, 9/23/15, 10/21/15, 11/18/15, 12/16/15, 1/13/16, 3/2/16, 5/4/16, 6/1/16, 9/28/16, 11/16/16,
2/1/17, 2/16/17, 5/3/17, 6/14/17, 6/28/17, 9/20/17, 3/21/18, 6/27/18

EH

Docket 333
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw
Trustee(s):
Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay
Franklin R Fraley Jr
11:00 AM
6:10-42721

Nancy Caroline Billow

Chapter 7

#3.00 United States Trustees Notice Of Motion And Motion For An Order Appointing Chapter 7 Trustee

EH

Docket 36
Tentative Ruling:
12/19/18
BACKGROUND

On October 8, 2010, Nancy Billow ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On January 20, 2010, the case was closed without a discharge for failure to file a financial management course certificate. On March 9, 2011, the case was reopened, and, the next day, Debtor received a discharge. On March 22, 2011, the case was closed again.

On February 27, 2016, Debtor filed a motion to reopen the case to allow Debtor to amend her schedules. On March 22, 2016, the case was reopened. Shortly thereafter, Debtor filed amended schedules to schedule, and exempt, a personal injury claim in the amount of $10,000. On May 31, 2016, the case was closed again.

On October 26, 2018, Debtor filed another motion to reopen the case, which was denied for failure to comply with the local rules. Debtor re-filed a new version of the motion on November 1, 2018, and, five days later, the case was reopened. On November 19, 2018, UST filed a motion for the appointment of a Chapter 7 trustee.
11:00 AM
CONT...

Nancy Caroline Billow

Chapter 7
DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 5010 states:

A case may be reopened on motion of the debtor or other party in interest pursuant to § 350(b) of the Code. In a chapter 7, 12, or 13 case a trustee shall not be appointed by the United States trustee unless the court determines that a trustee is necessary to protect the interests of creditors and the debtor or to insure efficient administration of the case.

Here, UST asserts that the personal injury claim is an asset potentially warranting administration by a Trustee. For that reason, and noting the lack of any opposition to the instant motion, the Court concludes that the appointment of a Chapter 7 trustee is warranted.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, APPOINTING a Chapter 7 trustee.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge order within seven days. If oral or written opposition is presented at the hearing, the hearing may be continued.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Nancy Caroline Billow Represented By Michael Shemtoub Marjorie M Johnson
11:00 AM
CONT...
Movant(s):

Nancy Caroline Billow

Chapter 7
United States Trustee (RS) Represented By Everett L Green
Trustee(s):
Robert Whitmore (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:15-18989

Yesenia Ferguson

Chapter 7

#4.00 Motion To Remedy Willful Violation of the Automatic Stay, Discharge Injunction by the Department of Veteran's Affairs and for Damages, Actual Damages, Punitive Damages (Should the Court Deem Appropriate), And Attorney's Fees

EH

Docket 14
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/9/19 AT 11:00 AM
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Yesenia Ferguson Represented By David L Nelson
Movant(s):
Yesenia Ferguson Represented By David L Nelson
Trustee(s):
Lynda T. Bui (TR) Pro Se
11:00 AM
6:17-14228

Michelle Meredith

Chapter 7

#5.00 Motion For Entry Of An Order: (1) Authorizing The Sale Of Real Property Located At 102 Tesori Drive, Palm Desert California Free And Clear Of Liens And Interests; (2) Approving Overbidding Procedure; (3) Authorizing Payment Of Real Estate Brokers Commission And Ordinary Costs Of Sale; (4) Finding Purchaser Is A Good Faith Purchaser; And (5) Waiving The 14 Day Stay Prescribed By Rule 6004

EH

Docket 131
Tentative Ruling:
12/19/18
BACKGROUND

On May 19, 2017, Michelle Meredith ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. Three days later, Debtor filed an amended Schedule A which identified certain real property located at 102 Tesori Dr., Palm Desert, CA 92211 (the "Property"). Schedule A identified the value of the Property as $450,500. Schedule C claimed an exemption in the Property in the amount of $175,000. Schedule D identified Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ("Creditor") as holding a secured claim against the Property in the amount of $312,456. On April 24, 2018, Debtor received a discharge.

On April 26, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to approve compromise. The subject of the compromise motion was the Debtor’s interest in certain family trusts. Pursuant to the compromise, Debtor was to purchase her interest in the family trusts for $140,000,
$104,429.14 of which was received prior to execution of the compromise. The compromise required Debtor to pay the balance within two weeks after entry of the order approving the compromise. In the event that the Trustee did not timely receive the balance of the compromise payment, the compromise provided that Trustee was to
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michelle Meredith

Chapter 7
liquidate the Property, and that Debtor’s homestead exemption would be subordinated to allow for full payment of the compromise amount. The compromise also provided for a weekly penalty in the amount of $300 if Debtor failed to timely tender the balance of the payment. The Court approved the compromise motion on May 21, 2018; Debtor did not timely tender the balance of the payments. On August 3, 2018, the Court approved a stipulation between the parties provided for turnover of the Property.1

On November 28, 2018, Trustee filed a motion for an order: (1) authorizing sale of real property free and clear of liens and interests; (2) approving overbid procedures;
1. authorizing payment of real estate commissions and costs of sale; (4) finding purchaser is a good faith purchaser; and (5) waiving the Rule 6004 stay.. Trustee proposes to sell the property to Thomas & Brenda Abdelnour for $468,000. Proposed payments from the proceeds include: (1) $2,657.37 for real property taxes; (2)
  $359,000 to Creditor to satisfy the first deed of trust; (3) $1,295 for a HOA lien; (4)
  $32,760 for costs of sale; (5) $38,570.86 for the estate; and (6) $33,716.78 for Debtor’s homestead exemption.
  
  On December 7, 2018, Creditor filed a limited opposition to the sale motion, asserting that the payoff balance for its claim was $367,782.83.
  
  DISCUSSION
  1. Sale of Estate Property
    
    11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1) allows a trustee to sell property of the estate outside of the ordinary course, after notice and a hearing. A sale pursuant to § 363(b) requires a demonstration that the sale has a valid business justification. In re 240 North Brand Parners, Ltd., 200 B.R. 653, 659 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1996). "In approving any sale outside the ordinary course of business, the court must not only articulate a sufficient business reason for the sale, it must further find it is in the best interest of the estate,
    i.e. it is fair and reasonable, that it has been given adequate marketing, that it has been
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Michelle Meredith
    
    Chapter 7
    negotiated and proposed in good faith, that the purchaser is proceeding in good faith, and that it is an "arms-length" transaction." In re Wilde Horse Enters., Inc., 136 B.R. 830, 841 (Bankr. C.D. Cal.).
    
    The motion contains minimal evidence of the Property’s marketing. Nevertheless, given the fact that the sale appears to be a good faith, arms-length transaction, that the sale price is approximately equal to the scheduled value of the Property, and that Trustee has proposed reasonable overbid procedures, the Court concludes that Trustee has articulated an adequate business reason for the sale.
  2. Sale Free & Clear of Liens
    
    11 U.S.C. § 363(f) (2010) states:
    1. The trustee may sell property under subsection (b) or (c) of this section free and clear of any interest in such property of an entity other than the estate, only if-
      1. applicable nonbankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest;
      2. such entity consents;
      3. such interest is a lien and the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on such property;
      4. such interest is in bona fide dispute; or
      5. such entity could be compelled, in a legal or equitable proceeding, to accept a money satisfaction of such interest.
    Here, the aggregate total value of the liens on the Property is materially less than the
    11:00 AM
    CONT...
    
    Michelle Meredith
    
    Chapter 7
    purchase price. Therefore, Trustee has established that 11 U.S.C. § 363(f)(3) is applicable, and the Court concludes that it is appropriate to authorize the sale free and clear of the first deed trust, the real property taxes, and the HOA lien. Furthermore, pursuant to the compromise motion and the stipulation for turnover of the Property, Debtor has consented to a subordination of her homestead exemption in order to pay the balance of the compromise amount.
  3. 14-Day Stay
    
    FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 6004(h) states: "An order authorizing the use, sale, or lease of property other than cash collateral is stayed until the expiration of 14 days after entry of the order, unless the court orders otherwise." The Court deems the absence of objections to be consent to the relief requested, pursuant to Local Rule 9013-(1)(h), and, therefore, will waive the stay of Rule 6004(h).
  4. Miscellaneous Provisions
The Court has reviewed the remainder of Trustee’s miscellaneous requests. The Court has reviewed the proposed overbidding procedures and finds such procedures to be reasonable. The Court has reviewed the requested Broker compensation of 5% of the sale price (totaling $3,600) and finds such compensation to be reasonable and customary. The Court has reviewed Trustee’s proposed distribution of sale proceeds, and the Court finds that such distribution is reasonable and proper.

Finally, the Court notes that Trustee has not provided any declarations of the purchasers. The Court will require further evidence or testimony from Thomas & Brenda Abdelnour if a good-faith finding pursuant to § 363(m) is sought.

TENTATIVE RULING
11:00 AM
CONT...

Michelle Meredith

Chapter 7

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion in its entirety conditioned on adequate evidence being provided to support a good-faith finding pursuant to § 363(m).
Otherwise, the Court is inclined to authorize the sale of the Property free and clear of liens, approve the overbid procedures, approve the Broker’s compensation, determine that the Purchasers are good faith purchasers, waive the 14-day stay under Rule 6004(h), and authorize the proposed payments from the sale proceeds.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michelle Meredith Pro Se
Movant(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By Noreen A Madoyan
Trustee(s):
Howard B Grobstein (TR) Represented By Noreen A Madoyan
11:00 AM
6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11

#6.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18, 11/27/18 EH
Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:
12/19/2018

All parties have authorization to appear telephonically for the 12/19/2018 Status Conference.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:09-01235 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#7.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18, 12/5/18

EH

Docket 1
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Defendant(s):
Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
David Loughnot
2:00 PM
CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Chapter 7
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
RICHARD K. DIAMOND Represented By
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried
Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
Trustee(s):
Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau
Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:10-01319 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#8.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
01/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18, 12/5/18

EH

Docket 1
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Defendant(s):
Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb
2:00 PM
CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett

Chapter 7
James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
Larry Day Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
Neil M Miller Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
Paul Roman Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld P Sabin Willett
O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
Peter T. Healy Represented By Howard Steinberg P Sabin Willett
Plaintiff(s):
RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Peter M Bransten
Michael I Gottfried Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder Cynthia M Cohen
2:00 PM
CONT...

Trustee(s):

Empire Land, LLC

Roye Zur

Chapter 7
Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau
Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur Amy Evans
Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond
2:00 PM
6:08-14592

Empire Land, LLC

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:10-01329 DIAMOND v. Empire Partners, Inc., a California Corporation et

#9.00 CONT Status Conference re complaint
(Defendant - Empire Partners, Inc) HOLDING DATE

From: 3/6/13, 6/5/13, 9/11/13, 11/13/13,12/18/13, 2/5/14, 3/12/14, 4/9/14, 4/16/14, 5/21/14, 8/27/14, 8/28/14, 9/10/14, 9/29/14, 11/10/14, 11/19/14,
1/21/15, 1/28/15, 2/19/15, 3/24/15, 5/28/15, 6/23/15, 8/12/15, 9/18/15, 10/6/15,
12/8/15, 1/20/16, 2/18/16, 3/23/16, 4/5/16, 4/13/16, 4/22/16, 6/6/16, 7/25/16,
10/3/16, 11/14/16, 1/23/17, 2/27/17, 4/24/17, 6/26/17, 8/2/17, 10/25/17,
11/27/17, 3/5/18, 6/11/18, 10/24/18, 12/5/18

EH

Docket 1
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Empire Land, LLC Represented By James Stang Robert M Saunders Michael I Gottfried
------ O'melveny & Myers Dean A Ziehl
Jonathan A Loeb P Sabin Willett
Richard K Diamond (TR) Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Defendant(s):
Empire Partners, Inc., a California Represented By
Jonathan A Loeb
2:00 PM
CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Jeffrey Rosenfeld

Chapter 7
James P Previti Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Previti Realty Fund, L.P. Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
The James Previti Family Trust Represented By Jonathan A Loeb Jeffrey Rosenfeld
Plaintiff(s):
RICHARD K DIAMOND Represented By
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Michael I Gottfried
Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
John P Reitman Peter M Bransten Cynthia M Cohen Roye Zur
Trustee(s):
Richard K Diamond (TR) Represented By Michael I Gottfried
Richard S Berger - SUSPENDED - Rodger M Landau
Richard K Diamond Peter M Bransten Aleksandra Zimonjic Monica Rieder
Lisa N Nobles Peter J Gurfein Paul Hastings Roye Zur
2:00 PM
CONT...

Empire Land, LLC

Amy Evans
Best Best & Krieger Franklin C Adams Thomas J Eastmond

Chapter 7
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11
Adv#: 6:17-01286 ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation et a v. Insurance Company

#10.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:17-ap-01286. Complaint by ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation, Another Meridian Company, LLC, Inland Machinery, Inc. against Gotte Electric, Inc., Insurance Company Of The West, Employment Development Department, Trico-Savi Business Park, L.P., a California limited partnership, Angela Denise McKnight, Steven Schonder, Western Alliance Bank, an Arizona corporation, United states of america, Carlin Law Group APC, Ledcor Construction, Inc., a Washington corporation, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. (Charge To Estate - $350.00).
Complaint in Interpleader Nature of Suit: (02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy))) (Bastian, James)
Trico-Savi Business Park L.P. - Dismissed 12/28/17
Western Alliance Bank, dba Torrey Pines Bank - Dismissed 2/1/18 Gotte Electric, Inc - Dismissed 3/14/18
Ledcor Construction Inc - Dismissed 3/26/18

From: 2/27/18, 10/9/18, 10/16/18 EH
Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Defendant(s):
Insurance Company Of The West Represented By
Jennifer Leland
2:00 PM
CONT...

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation
David B Shemano Howard J Weg

Chapter 11
Employment Development Represented By
Elisa B Wolfe-Donato
Angela Denise McKnight Pro Se
Steven Schonder Pro Se
United states of america Represented By Charles Parker Najah J Shariff
Carlin Law Group APC Represented By Kevin R Carlin
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Another Meridian Company, LLC Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
Inland Machinery, Inc. Represented By James C Bastian Jr
Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#11.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Another Meridian Company LLC

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18, 10/16/18

Also #12 & #13 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#12.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re ASR Constructors Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18, 10/16/18

Also #11 & #13 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-25794

ASR Constructors Inc a California Corporation

Chapter 11

#13.00 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing and Case Management Conference and (2) Requiring Status Report re Inland Machinery, Inc

From: 3/7/17, 7/11/17, 7/24/17, 9/26/17, 10/24/17, 1/30/18, 2/27/18, 10/9/18, 10/16/18

Also #11 & #12 EH
Docket 630

Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information
ASR Constructors Inc a California Represented By
James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe
2:00 PM
6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#14.00 Motion of Liberty Orthopedic Corporation to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding on First Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted, to Strike Claims for Relief, or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement

Also #15 - #17

EH

Docket 108
Tentative Ruling:
12/19/18
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On October 20, 2013, Douglas J. Roger, MD, Inc. ("Debtor") filed a Chapter 7 voluntary petition. On October 20, 2015, the Chapter 7 trustee filed a complaint against OIC Medical Corporation ("OIC"), Liberty Orthopedic Corporation ("LOC") and Universal Ortopaedic Group ("UOG") (collectively, "Defendants") for avoidance, recovery, and preservation of preferential and fraudulent transfers.
On four occasions, the parties stipulated to a continuance of the initial status conference and an extension of the deadline to file a responsive pleading. On June 20, 2016, Trustee and Revere Financial Corporation ("Revere") filed a joint motion for a temporary stay of the adversary proceeding on the grounds that Trustee and Revere were negotiating a global settlement which would, inter alia, possibly provide for the assignment of the instant adversary proceeding to Revere. On July 12, 2016, the Court entered an order granting the motion, staying the adversary proceeding until August 31, 2016. After the temporary stay of the adversary proceeding expired, the parties
2:00 PM
CONT...
Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
Chapter 7
stipulated to an additional twelve continuances of the initial status conference, each including an extension of the deadline to file a responsive pleading.

On May 14, 2018, Revere purchased the bankruptcy estate’s interest in any claims that the estate owned against Defendants – including the instant adversary proceeding. On May 24, 2018, Revere filed, in federal district court, a motion for an order withdrawing the reference. On August 9, 2018, Judge Otero denied the motion, holding that there was no cause for a permissive withdrawal of the reference.

On October 24, 2018, Defendants filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. In lieu of opposing the motions, Revere filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint included fourteen claims: (a) violation of the receiver order; (b) intentional fraudulent transfer (three claims); (c) conversion; (d) postpetition transfer; (e) preferential transfer; (f) subsequent transferee liability; (g) successor liability; (h) aiding and abetting; (i) agent liability; (j) alter ego; (k) unjust enrichment; (l) money had and received.1 On November 28, 2018, Defendants again filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On December 5, 2018, Revere filed its opposition.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The complicated factual history of the instant case, while detailed extensively in the amended complaint, warrants brief summarization here. Debtor’s bankruptcy, and the instant adversary proceeding, stem from a promissory note executed on August 21, 2007 by Douglas Roger ("Roger"), and in favor of 1st Centennial Bank. This loan was guaranteed by Debtor, and both Roger and Debtor additionally executed a related commercial security agreement, pledging all assets as collateral for the promissory note. Later, on December 7, 2007, Roger and Debtor guaranteed another promissory note, on behalf of Baleine LP ("Baleine"), and in favor of 1st Centennial Bank. Both of the aforementioned loans had maturity dates exactly one year from their execution dates. At the time of the maturity dates, 1st Centennial Bank had lent $350,000 on the first loan and $500,000 on the second loan. According to the complaint, neither Roger, Debtor, nor Baleine LP or its principal Nicole Ebarb (collectively, the "Roger Defendants") made a payment on the loans. In June 2009, Revere was assigned the
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
loans by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

On December 29, 2009, Revere commenced state court litigation to attempt to collect on the loans. Ultimately, on March 18, 2013, the state court entered a receivership order and appointed Jerry Wang as receiver. As detailed in the complaint, the Roger Defendants failed to comply with the receivership order. After holding a trial on contempt of court, the state court convicted these parties of contempt of court on October 16, 2013, incarcerating Roger and Nicole Ebarb. In the week after these convictions, the instant bankruptcy, as well as multiple related bankruptcies, were filed.

As detailed in pages twelve through twenty-two of the amended complaint, Revere now alleges an extensive scheme by the Roger Defendants to hinder, delay, and defraud Revere. Specifically, Revere alleges that the Roger Defendants utilized and controlled at least sixteen different business entities spread across California, Nevada, Colorado, and Arizona to hide and shield assets. Revere also details nine purported fraudulent transfers of real property in California and Missouri. Finally, Revere identifies a variety of transfers of property by the Roger Defendants for less than equivalent value.

DISCUSSION
1. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD
  
  FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6), made applicable in adversary proceedings through FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7012, a bankruptcy court may dismiss a complaint if it fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." In reviewing a FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the trial court must accept as true all facts alleged in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2001). The trial court need not, however, accept as true conclusory allegations in a complaint or legal characterizations cast in the form of factual allegations. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555–56, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  L.Ed.2d 929 (2007); Hartman v. Gilead Scis., Inc. (In re Gilead Scis. Sec. Litig.), 536 F.3d 1049, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).
  
  To avoid dismissal under FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must aver in the complaint "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173
  L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). It is axiomatic that a claim cannot be plausible when it has no legal basis. A dismissal under FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(b)(6) may be based either on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or on the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008).
2. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
  
  As noted earlier, shortly after Revere purchased the estate’s interest in claims against Defendants, Revere moved to withdraw the reference. One of Revere’s arguments was that this Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims. At the time Revere made this argument, the operative complaint only included causes of actions for preferential and fraudulent transfers. Now, Revere has amended the complaint to include state law causes of action.
  
  As a result of the amendment of the complaint, the Court must consider whether it has subject matter jurisdiction over the purely state law causes of action. See, e.g., In re Strawberry, 464 B.R. 443, 447 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 2012). The amended complaint would result in litigation over non-bankruptcy claims between non-debtor parties.
  
  28 U.S.C. § 157 provides for four categories of cases which the district court may refer to the bankruptcy court: (1) cases under title 11; (2) proceedings arising under title 11; (3) proceedings arising in a case under title 11; and (4) proceedings related to a case under title 11. See, e.g., In re S&M Constructors, Inc., 144 B.R. 855, 858 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1992). Additionally, 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) divides matters into core and non-core proceedings.
  
  The first category, cases under title 11, refers to the bankruptcy case commenced by
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  the filing of the petition. See, e.g., In re Wood, 825 F.2d 90, 92 (5th Cir. 1987). This category is inapplicable here, as the matter at issue is an adversary complaint.
  
  The second category, proceedings arising under title 11, refers to those actions that are expressly created by title 11. See, e.g., In re Wolverine Radio Co., Inc., 930 F.2d 1132, 1141, n.14 (6th Cir. 1991). This category is inapplicable to the state law causes of action, which would, axiomatically, not be created by title 11.
  
  The third category2, proceedings arising in a case under title 11, refers to claims that, although not created by title 11, would have no existence absent the bankruptcy, such as administrative matters. See, e.g., In re Repository Techs., Inc., 601 F.3d 710, 719 (7th Cir. 2010). This category is inapplicable to the state law causes of action.
  
  The fourth category, proceedings related to a case under title 11, contains two different subsets: (1) causes of action owned by the debtor that become property of the estate under § 541; and (2) suits between third parties which in one way or another affect the administration of the bankruptcy case. Id. The former subset is no longer applicable to the state law causes of action because Revere purchases the claims and, as a result, those claims are no longer property of the estate.
  
  The latter subset, sometimes referred to as related-to jurisdiction, is governed by the
  Pacor test. To wit:
  
  The usual articulation of the test for determining whether a civil proceeding is related to bankruptcy is whether the outcome of that proceeding could conceivably have any effect on the estate being administered in bankruptcy.
  Thus, the proceeding need not necessarily be against the debtor or against the debtor’s property. An action is related to bankruptcy if the outcome could alter the debtor’s rights, liabilities, options, or freedom of action . . . and which in any way impacts upon the handling and administration of the bankrupt estate.
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Pacor, Inc. v. Higgins, 743 F.2d 984, 994 (3rd Cir. 1984). The Supreme Court previously acknowledged the prevalence of the Pacor test:
  
  In attempting to strike an appropriate balance, the Third Circuit in Pacor, Inc.
  v. Higgins, 743 F.2d 984 (1984), devised the following test for determining the existence of "related to" jurisdiction:
  
  [Excerpt quoted above] . . .
  
  The First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eight, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have adopted the Pacor test with little or no variation. The Second and Seventh Circuits, on the other hand, seem to have adopted a slightly different test. But whatever test is used, these cases make clear that bankruptcy courts have no jurisdiction over proceedings that have no effect on the estate of the debtor.
  
  Celotex Corp. v. Edwards, 514 U.S. 300, 308 n.6 (1995) (citations omitted).
  
  It is unclear how the state law claims in the amended complaint could have any conceivable effect on the estate being administered in bankruptcy. These claims were purchased by Revere, a creditor of Debtor, for a fixed sum, and the bankruptcy estate does not appear to have any remaining interest or concern with this adversary proceeding.
  
  While the Court does not appear to have subject matter jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant to any of the categories of original jurisdiction enumerated above, the Court may have supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) states:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) or as expressly provided otherwise by Federal statute, in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Such supplemental jurisdiction shall include claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties.
  
  The applicability of the above statute to bankruptcy proceedings is not a settled issue: "There is a split of authority on the issue of whether bankruptcy courts have supplemental jurisdiction under § 1367(a). The majority of the cases conclude that bankruptcy courts do not have supplemental jurisdiction. A small minority of cases holds otherwise." GINSBERG & MARTIN ON BANKRUPTCY § 1.03 (5th ed. 2018). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is among that "small minority" which has concluded that bankruptcy courts have supplemental jurisdiction. See In re Sasson, 424 F.3d 864 (9th Cir. 2005) ("Thus, at present, the bankruptcy court’s ‘related to’ jurisdiction also includes the district court’s supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within the court’s original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.").
  
  Here, the Court clearly has original subject matter jurisdiction over the bankruptcy law fraudulent transfer claim, the preferential transfer claim, and the postpetition transfer claim. While neither party has argued the issue, it does not appear to be in dispute that the factual nexus of the state law claims sufficiently overlaps with the federal claims such that all claims form part of the same case or controversy.
  Therefore, pursuant to the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), the Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction over the complaint.
3. PREFERENTIAL TRANSFER CLAIM
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  The seventh claim for relief in the amended complaint is a preferential transfer claim pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547. A claim pursuant to § 547 has six elements: (1) transfer of an interest in property; (2) to or for the benefit of a creditor; (3) on account of an antecedent debt; (4) while the debtor is insolvent; (5) within 90 days of the petition, or within one year of the petition if the recipient of the transfer is an insider; and (6) such transfer enables the creditor to receive more than it would under a hypothetical liquidation. Defendants argue that Revere has failed to adequately plead two of the required elements: (1) that the subject transfer(s) were to or for the benefit of Defendants; and (2) that the transfer was made on account of an antecedent debt.
  Defendants cite caselaw which stands for the proposition that a claim for a preferential transfer "must assert the nature and amount of the antecedent debt in order to allege a plausible claim for relief." [Dkt. No. 108, pg. 12]. Revere argues that the amended complaint adequately identifies the subject transfers that were made for the benefit of Defendants. Revere also argues that Defendants’ caselaw, which requires specificity when pleading an antecedent debt, is not the appropriate legal standard.
  
  The Court agrees with Revere that it has adequately alleged that Debtor made preferential transfers to Defendants. Specifically, as noted by Revere in its opposition, paragraph 77 of the amended complaint contains an extensive list of categories of transfers that Revere believes constitute preferential transfers. To require more at the pleading stage would essentially require Revere to provide a roadmap and/or prove its case prior to discovery.
  
  Regarding Defendants’ argument that Revere has not adequately alleged an antecedent debt, the Court notes that if Defendants’ legal standard is appropriate, then it appears Revere has not met that standard. Specifically, the Court notes the amended complaint appears to only refer to Debtor’s "substantial debts" generally, without alleging any specific debt owed to Defendants. Furthermore, paragraph 117 of the amended complaint simply states that "to the extent that [Debtor] . . . owed an antecedent debt to [Defendants]" the transfers at issue were on account of such antecedent debt.
  
  Revere argues that the legal standard identified in In re Caremerica, Inc., 415 B.R. 200 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2009) and In re Valley Media, Inc., 288 B.R. 189 (Bankr. D. Del. 2003) is not the appropriate legal standard. The latter case stated the following:
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  
  the following information must be included in a complaint to avoid preferential transfers in order to survive a motion to dismiss: (a) an identification of the nature and amount of each antecedent debt and (b) an identification of each alleged preference transfer by (i) date, (ii) name of debtor/transferor, (iii) name of transferee and (iv) the amount of the transfer.
  
  In re Valley Media, Inc., 288 B.R. at 192.3 It does appear, however, that a majority of the courts that have thoroughly considered the In re Valley Media, Inc. decision have rejected its standard. See, e.g., In re TOUSA, Inc., 442 B.R. 852, 854 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2010) ("Valley Media was decided in 2003 and many courts, including a court within its district, declined to follow its pleading requirements as too harsh in light of the Conley v. Gibson regiment. But the Court in Caremerica opined ‘’that the decisions by the Supreme Court in Twombly and Iqbal breathe new life into the pleading requirements implemented in Valley Media for § 547 preference claims. Many courts continue to disagree with Valley Media and Caremerica.") (footnotes omitted); In re NM Holdings Co., LLC, 376 B.R. 194, 204 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2007) ("The
  heightened pleading requirements imposed by the Valley Media case are inconsistent with the liberal notice-pleading principles under the civil rules."); In re Randall’s Island Family Golf Ctrs., Inc., 290 B.R. 55, 65 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2003) ("[W]hile the information identified by Valley Media might ultimately be necessary to adjudicate the preference claims, it does not follow that it must be pleaded on pain of dismissal."). But see In re Caremerica, Inc., 409 B.R. 737 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2009) (noting that "the majority of courts which have addressed the pleading requirements for § 547 claims have required something less than the standard implemented in Valley Media to survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss" but also noting that the Supreme Court implemented "more stringent pleading requirements" when deciding Twombly and Iqbal).
  
  While the Court is not convinced that In re Valley Media, Inc. represents the appropriate pleading standard for a preference action, the Court concludes that the amended complaint does not adequately plead an antecedent debt. Revere has not pointed to a single section of the amended complaint which even contains an unsupported legal conclusion that Debtor owed Defendants an antecedent debt, let alone a section which provides any factual assertions to support such a conclusion. Revere’s general allegation that Debtor owed debt, and the implication in paragraph
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  117 that Debtor likely owed a debt to Defendants is, quite simply, inadequate. Again, this conclusion does not amount to a holding that Revere is required to allege an antecedent debt with the level of specificity required in, for example, In re Tweeter Opco, 452 B.R. 150 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011). Revere is, however, required to allege that some sort of antecedent debt exists, and the amended complaint does not contain any such allegation. Therefore, the Court is inclined to dismiss the seventh claim for relief, with leave to amend.
4. INTENTIONAL FRAUDULENT TRANSFER CLAIMS
  
  The second, third, and fourth claims for relief in the amended complaint are intentional fraudulent transfer claims. Specifically, the second claim for relief is a
  § 548(a) fraudulent transfer claim, the third claim for relief is a CAL. CIV. CODE
  § 3439.07 fraudulent transfer claim, and the fourth claim for relief is a California common law fraudulent transfer claim. As noted by Defendants in the motion to dismiss, it also appears that the eighth through twelfth claims for relief (namely subsequent transferee liability, successor liability, aiding and abetting, agent liability, and alter ego) are additional theories of liability upon which Revere alleges that it can recover the fraudulent transfers identified in the second through fourth claims for relief. As such, it would appear that the eighth through twelfth claims for relief do not have viability independent from the second through fourth claims for relief.
  
  Defendants argue that the amended complaint fails to satisfy the heightened pleading requirements of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9 because it fails to plead fraud with particularity. Revere asserts that the amended complaint adequately pleads fraud, and argues that bankruptcy courts relax FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9 requirements, especially when the material facts are within the defendants’ knowledge.
  
  As noted by Defendants, allegations regarding fraud are generally subject to a heightened pleading standard. FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b), made applicable to adversary proceedings by FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 7009, requires that a plaintiff must state "with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. " The Ninth Circuit has provided
  guidance for the "with particularity" requirement by stating that to comport with Civil Rule 9(b) the complaint must (1) specify the averred fraudulent representations; (2)
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  aver the representations were false when made; (3) identify the speaker; (4) state when and where the statements were made; and (5) state the manner in which the representations were false and misleading. Lancaster Cmty. Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d 397, 405 (9th Cir.1991).
  
  Because fraud encompasses a wide variety of circumstances, the requirements of FED.
  R. CIV. P. Rule 9(b)—like FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 8(a)(2)—require that a plaintiff should provide all defendants with sufficient information to formulate a response. In Cooper
  v. Pickett, 137 F.3d 616, 627 (9th Cir.1997), however, the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that "[e]very transaction alleged to be fraudulent does not have to be detailed in the complaint." Instead, the Rule 9(b) requirement is satisfied where the complaint sets forth an explanation as to why the transactions were false or misleading. See Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d at 625.
  
  Regarding Revere’s argument that a more relaxed pleading standard applies to the instant situation, either as a general rule in bankruptcy courts, or in the more specific situation where the facts are within the defendants’ knowledge, the Court disagree with the former, but agrees with the latter. While ample case law standards for the proposition that the heightened pleading requirements are relaxed by bankruptcy courts in the context of a fraudulent transfer claim, typically such a claim is brought by a trustee. Here, Revere’s status as a creditor which purchased the estate’s interest in the fraudulent transfer claim functionally brings this action outside the context of the underlying bankruptcy proceeding, placing Revere in the same situation as a creditor bringing a state law fraudulent transfer claim in state court. Therefore, the Court concludes that Revere does not appear to be entitled to the relaxing of the FED. R. CIV.
  P. Rule 9 pleading requirements which may be afforded a Chapter 7 Trustee.
  
  The Court agrees with Revere, however, that the specific factual situation alleged here (i.e. fraudulent transfers made by Debtor to Defendants and a variety of non-parties) warrants a relaxing of the FED. R. CIV. P Rule 9 pleading requirement. See, e.g., Concha
  v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1503 ("Rule 9(b) thus requires that plaintiffs specifically plead those facts surrounding alleged acts of fraud to which they can reasonably be expected to have access."); Neubronner v. Milken, 6 F.3d 666, 672 (9th Cir. 1993) ("This court has held that the general rule that allegations of fraud based on information and belief do not satisfy Rule 9(b) may be relaxed with respect to matters within the opposing party’s knowledge.").
  2:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat
  
  Chapter 7
  As noted by Defendants in the motion to dismiss, the elements of an actual fraudulent transfers under § 548(a)(1)(A) are: (1) the debtor transferred an interest in property or incurred a debt; (2) on or within two years before the petition filing date; and (3) with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a present or future creditors. Defendants assert that Revere has failed to plead particularized transfers of property. In light of the preceding paragraph, the Court concludes that the factual allegations set forth in ¶¶ 77 and 79 of the amended complaint do contain factual matter which is, taken as a whole, sufficiently detailed to put Defendants on notice of the claims assert against them.
  
  Nevertheless, the Court notes that ¶¶ 77 and 79 are structured in a rather confusing matter. Specifically, paragraph 77 documents a long list of different categories of action which appear to be presented in that matter to demonstrate an elaborate fraudulent scheme carried out by Debtor and Roger Defendants. In reviewing ¶ 77, however, the Court notes that many of the allegations do not actually relate to Defendants at all. Specifically, six of the thirteen subsections of that paragraph do not mention Defendants at all, but instead refer to transfers purportedly made by Debtor or the Roger Defendants to non-parties. Six of the remaining subsections are phrased in a disjunctive, non-exhausting manner. For example, paragraph (77)(a) reads:
  1. RFC alleges on information and belief that, while Roger, BLP, and DJRI wrongfully possessed the Collateral, Roger, BLP, and DJRI, with the help of, among others, the DJRI Agents, converted the collateral by:
    1. Transferring hundreds of thousands of dollars from the proceeds of the Collateral to Ebarb, OIC, LOC, UOG, other limited partnerships/corporations in which Roger, BLP, and/or DJRI had an interest, and/or other insiders;

The manner in which this allegation is drafted renders it potentially wholly inapplicable to the instant adversary proceeding. Given the repeated use of disjunctive and non-exhaustive lists it is not remotely clear from ¶ 77(a) that the allegation represents a claim Revere has standing to bring in this case (because it is not clear that Debtor was the alleged transferor) or that Defendants are the proper defendants (because it is not clear Defendants are the alleged transferees).

Paragraph 79, on the other hand, contains recitations of alleged fraudulent transfers which are specific to Debtor and Defendants. These recitations, however, are

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

completely lacking in the specificity contained in paragraph 77. Nevertheless, given the relaxed pleading standard appropriate in this situation, and the extensive detail recited in the background section, the Court concludes that the amended complaint, when taken as a whole, adequately alleges fraudulent transfer claims.

POSTPETITION TRANSFER CLAIM AND MISCELLANEOUS CALIFORNIA CLAIMS

The sixth claim for relief in the amended complaint is a claim for postpetition transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 549(a). 11 U.S.C. § 549(d)(1) requires that a § 549 claim be brought within two years of the date of the transfer to be avoided. The California Claims Defendants argue that the sixth claim for relief does not relate back to the filing of the original complaint and, as a result, may be time-barred. Revere argues that: (a) the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense and Defendants have not demonstrated that the postpetition transfer claim is time barred; and (b) the postpetition transfer claim relates back to the original complaint.

The Court agrees with Revere that the fact that the claim may be time-barred is inadequate to support dismissal at the pleading stage. As has been stated by the Ninth Circuit:

A claim may be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) on the ground that it is barred by the applicable statute of limitations only when "the running of the statute is apparent on the face of the complaint." Huyhn v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 465 F.3d 992, 997 (9th Cir. 2006). "A complaint cannot be dismissed unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would establish the timeliness of the claim." Supermail Cargo, Inc., U.S., 68 F.3d 1204, 1206 (9th Cir. 1995).

Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena, 592 F.3d 954, 969 (9th Cir. 2010). Here, Defendants’ argument amounts to reversing the burden of proof on the affirmative defense. Defendants’ assertion that the sixth claim may be time-barred is not adequate to support dismissal.

The fifth, thirteenth, and fourteenth claims for relief are conversion, unjust enrichment, and money had and received, respectively. Regarding conversion, it appears that Defendants are arguing that the conversion claim does not relate back to the original complaint. Yet, for the reasons stated in the preceding paragraph, the mere
2:00 PM
CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7
fact that the conversion claim may be time-barred is inadequate to support dismissal at the pleading stage.

Defendants argue that unjust enrichment is not a valid cause of action. Revere argues that unjust enrichment is a valid cause of action. In California, there is a split of authority as to whether unjust enrichment can operate as a cause of action or is merely a theory of liability. Compare Lectrodryer v. SeoulBank, 77 Cal. App. 4th 723, 726 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) and Peterson v. Cellco, 164 Cal. App. 4th 1583 (Cal. Ct. App.
2008) (unjust enrichment is a cause of action) with Melchior v. New Line Prods., Inc., 106 Cal. App. 4th 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) and Durell v. Sharp Healthcare, 183 Cal. App. 4th 1350 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). While Revere argues that the California Supreme Court, in Ghirardo v. Antonioli, 14 Cal. 4th 39 (Cal. 1996), concluded unjust enrichment was a cause of action, the cited case does not stand for that proposition.

The Ninth Circuit recently weighed in on the caselaw split, stating that "in California, there is not a standalone cause of action for ‘unjust enrichment,’ which is synonymous with ‘restitution.’" Astiana v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., 783 F.3d 753, 762 (9th Cir. 2015). The Ninth Circuit additionally stated that "[w]hen a plaintiff alleges unjust enrichment, a court may construe the cause of action as a quasi-contract claim seeking restitution." Id. Here, it does not appear that such a construction would be compatible with the facts as pled in the amended complaint. In accordance with the recent Ninth Circuit ruling, and the California trend to not recognize unjust enrichment as a stand- alone cause of action, the Court is inclined to dismiss the thirteenth claim for relief, with leave to amend.

Regarding money had and received, Defendants’ argument is somewhat unclear, although it appears to amount to a contention that Revere has not adequately pled that Defendants were the recipients of any transfers of property or funds. For the reasons stated in the fraudulent transfer section, and given that this claim is not subject to the heightened pleading requirement of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 9, the Court rejects Defendants’ argument.
VIOLATION OF RECEIVERSHIP ORDER CLAIM

The first claim for relief in the amended complaint is for violation of the receivership order. Defendants’ argument appears to be that Revere lacks standing to bring this claim. Specifically, Defendants note that "Plaintiff brings its FAC as successor to, and

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

in the name of Arturo Cisneros, the Chapter 7 trustee." [Dkt. No. 108, pg. 18]. Revere argues that "Whether the claim for violation of the receivership order belongs to RFS personally or belonged to the DJRI Trustee is of no moment – RFS as both creditor and as successor-in-interest to all claims by the DJRI Trustee against the OIC Defendants has standing in one capacity or the other." [Dkt. No. 108, pg. 30].

The Court agrees with Revere – although the confusion seems to have been caused by Revere’s drafting. Quite simply, it is legally incorrect for Revere to state that it is bringing these claims in the name of the Chapter 7 Trustee. While that may be the situation if the claims were assigned to a liquidating trust, with Revere as liquidating trustee, such situation did not occur. Instead Revere purchased the claims in its own name; neither the Chapter 7 Trustee nor the bankruptcy estate has any interest in these claims, nor would it have standing to prosecute them. Therefore, while it appears uncontested that Revere has standing to prosecute the first claim for relief as a creditor of Debtor, the Court notes that it does not appear Revere has properly and clearly identified the plaintiff in this case.

Finally, the Court notes that there appears to be confusion regarding the amended complaint’s alter ego claim. That claim is identified as the twelfth claim for relief in the amended complaint’s caption, but is inaccurately identified as the tenth claim for relief in the body of the amended complaint. In Defendants’ motion to dismiss, Defendants characterize the alter ego claim as a theory of recovery related to the fraudulent transfer claims. Then, despite omitting the section from the table of contents, Defendants additionally present an argument that "alter ego" should be dismissed because it is not a stand-alone cause of action. Given that the recitations in the alter ego claim parallel the recitations in the eighth through eleventh causes for action (which are simply theories of recovery predicated on the fraudulent transfer claims) the Court will treat the alter ego claim in the same fashion and not evaluate it as a stand-alone cause of action.

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court is inclined to GRANT the motion to the extent of dismissing the seventh claim for relief (preferential transfer) and thirteenth claim for relief (unjust enrichment) without prejudice and DENY the remainder of the motion. The Court is inclined to DENY Defendants’ alternative request for a more definite statement for

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

failure to comply with the procedural requirements of FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 12(e). Nevertheless, the Court notes that the following issues may need clarification (1) the proper plaintiff in this action; (2) the identity of the relevant actors in each component of the fraudulent scheme relevant in this adversary proceeding; and (3) which "claims" are causes of action and which are merely theories of liability or recovery related to the fraudulent transfer claims.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Movant(s):

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chad V Haes

Chapter 7

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#15.00 Motion of OIC Medical Corporation to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding on First Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted, to Stike Claims forRelief, or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement

Also #14 - #17

Docket 109

Tentative Ruling:

See tentative ruling for #14.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#16.00 Motion of Universal Orthopedic Corporation to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding on First Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief can be Granted, to Strike Claims for Relief, or in the Alternative for a more Definite Statement

Also #14 - #17

Docket 110

Tentative Ruling:

See tentative ruling for #14.

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

2:00 PM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27344

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:15-01307 Cisneros v. OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a California corporation

#17.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:15-ap-01307. Complaint by

From: 12/30/15, 2/24/16, 4/13/16, 6/22/16, 8/24/16, 11/2/16, 2/1/17, 3/8/17, 7/12/17, 9/13/17, 11/15/17, 2/14/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18, 8/22/18, 10/31/18,

11/14/18, 12/12/18

Also #14 - #16

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Represented By Summer M Shaw Michael S Kogan George Hanover

Defendant(s):

OIC MEDICAL CORPORATION, a Represented By

Misty A Perry Isaacson

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas J Roger, MD, Inc., A Professional Corporat

Chapter 7

LIBERTY ORTHOPEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

UNIVERSAL ORTHOPAEDIC Represented By

Misty Perry Isaacson Misty A Perry Isaacson

Plaintiff(s):

A. Cisneros Represented By

D Edward Hays Chad V Haes

Trustee(s):

Arturo Cisneros (TR) Represented By Chad V Haes

D Edward Hays Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01199 Revere Financial Corporation v. Bank of Southern California, N.A.

#18.00 Motion by Revere Financial Corporation, as Liquidating Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Douglas J. Roger, to Extend Discovery Cut-Off

Docket 118

Tentative Ruling:

12/19/2018

BACKGROUND

On July 29, 2016, Revere Financial Corporation ("Revere"), as liquidating trustee for the estate of Douglas Jay Roger, filed an adversary complaint against Bank of Southern California ("BSC") seeking recovery of various transfers alleged to be fraudulent transfers and/or preferences (the "BSC Action"). The BSC Action was dismissed with prejudice on September 7, 2017. However, following successful appeal by Revere, the dismissal was vacated and the case was reinstated on June 4, 2018. On August 28, 2018, the Court entered a scheduling order setting a discovery cut-off date of January 30, 2019.

On December 10, 2018, Revere filed a Motion to Extend the Discovery Cut- Off ("Motion"), which the Court permitted to be set on shortened time by order entered on December 11, 2018. BSC filed its Objection to the Motion on December 14, 2018. Revere replied to BSC on December 18, 2018.

DISCUSSION

Every court has the inherent power to "control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants." Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). As part of this inherent power, courts are "given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation, and its decisions regarding the preclusive effect of a pretrial order . . . will not be disturbed

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

unless they evidence a clear abuse of discretion." C.F. ex rel. Farnan v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist., 654 F.3d 975, 984 (9th Cir. 2011). A court may, therefore, modify a scheduling order, including continuing the discovery cut-off date, for good cause.

Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 16(b)(4).

The Court is cognizant that Revere is managing litigation related to various related Roger adversaries on multiple fronts, has not delayed in seeking recovery, and otherwise presented sufficient rationale so as to justify a short extension of discovery under the circumstances. The Court finds that Revere’s request for a 90-day extension to April 30, 2019, is reasonable under the circumstances.

TENTATIVE RULING

Based on the foregoing, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Jay Roger Represented By Summer M Shaw

Defendant(s):

Bank of Southern California, N.A. Represented By

Kathryn M.S. Catherwood

Movant(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

Plaintiff(s):

Revere Financial Corporation Represented By Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

Helen R. Frazer (TR) Represented By Laurel R Zaeske Arjun Sivakumar Carmela Pagay

Franklin R Fraley Jr

2:00 PM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01035 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson

#19.00 CONT Status Conference re Notice of Removal RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18- ap-01035. Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua C Richardson. Case No. RIC 1700456]; Attachments: # 1 Notice of Status Conference re Removal of Action Nature of Suit: 01 - Determination of removed claim or cause

From: 3/28/18, 6/13/18, 7/25/18, 10/24/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Defendant(s):

Joshua C Richardson Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By Laila Masud

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01061 Farah v. Bastorous et al

#20.00 Status Conference RE: [34] Amended Complaint Second Amended Complaint for Nondischargeability based on 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Mina Farah against Bernadette Shenouda. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:18-ap-01061. Complaint by Mina Farah, Mark Bastorous against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(01 (Determination of removed claim or cause)) filed by Plaintiff Mina Farah). (Suojanen, Wayne)

Docket 34

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

2:00 PM

CONT...

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Plaintiff(s):

Mina Farah Represented By

Wayne W Suojanen

Trustee(s):

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:17-20092

Mark Bastorous

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01062 Khalil v. Bastorous et al

#21.00 Status Conference RE: [32] Amended Complaint Second Amended Complaint for Nondischargeability based on 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A) by Wayne W Suojanen on behalf of Anis Khalil against Bernadette Shenouda. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:18-ap-01062. Complaint by Anis Khalil against Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Shenouda. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)),(65 (Dischargeability - other)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) filed by Plaintiff Anis Khalil). (Suojanen, Wayne)

Docket 32

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Defendant(s):

Mark Bastorous Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Joint Debtor(s):

Bernadette Shenouda Represented By Thomas F Nowland

Plaintiff(s):

Anis Khalil Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Mark Bastorous

Wayne W Suojanen

Chapter 7

John P Pringle (TR) Represented By David M Goodrich Reem J Bello

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman and Anne Louise Goodman

Chapter 13 #22.00 CONT Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 11 by Claimant Natasha Reynoso and Mark Reynoso

HOLDING DATE

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 7/11/18, 10/24/18

Docket 44

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#23.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (Third Amended Complaint)

(Holding Date)

From: 8/2/18, 10/24/18 Also #24

Docket 97

Tentative Ruling:

08/02/2018

BACKGROUND

On September 12, 2016, Douglas and Anne Goodman (collectively, "Debtors" or "Defendants") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief.

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

corrected for typographical errors. (the "Corrected Complaint"). The Court denied Defendants’ second motion to dismiss at a hearing on May 4, 2017. On June 5, 2017, the Defendants filed their Answer to the FAC ("Answer").

DISCUSSION

As a threshold matter, the Motion seeks relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).

However, given that the Defendants have filed an Answer to the FAC, the Court shall construe the Motion as a motion under Rule 12(c), a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Civil Rule 12(c) standard

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Gen., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 189 F.3d 971, 981 n. 18 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Barron v. Reich, 13 F.3d 1370, 1377 (9th Cir.1994)).

Nonetheless, Plaintiffs should not have to guess at the state law basis of the debt for a money judgment.

Here, the SAC has added bases for calculation of damages under state law but has still not set forth the state law basis for the monetary judgment.

TENTATIVE RULING

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Movant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Douglas Edward Goodman Pro Se

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Anne Louise Goodman Pro Se

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:16-18182

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:16-01277 Reynoso v. Goodman et al

#24.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [13] Amended Complaint by Michael J Hemming on behalf of Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Anne Louise Goodman, Douglas Edward Goodman. (RE: related document(s)1 Adversary case 6:16-ap-01277. Complaint by Mark & Natasha Reynoso against Douglas Edward Goodman, Anne Louise Goodman. false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)) filed by Plaintiff Mark & Natasha Reynoso)

(Holding Date)

From: 5/4/17, 8/24/17, 8/31/17, 9/14/17, 11/9/17, 12/20/17, 2/28/18, 7/11/18, 10/24/18

Also #23 EH

Docket 13

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Defendant(s):

Douglas Edward Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Theresa Mann Represented By Andrew L Leff

2:00 PM

CONT...

Douglas Edward Goodman

Chapter 13

Jose Pastora Represented By

Andrew L Leff

Joint Debtor(s):

Anne Louise Goodman Represented By Edward T Weber

Plaintiff(s):

Mark & Natasha Reynoso Represented By Michael J Hemming

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

2:00 PM

6:17-16064

Thomas Franklin Shea

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01161 Simons (TR) v. Thompson

#25.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01161. Complaint by Larry D Simons (TR) against Joseph Edward Thompson. (Charge To Estate -

$350.00). Nature of Suit: (31 (Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co- owner - 363(h))) (Simons (TR), Larry)

From: 10/17/18 EH

Docket 1

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Thomas Franklin Shea Represented By Richard J Hassen

Defendant(s):

Joseph Edward Thompson Pro Se

Joint Debtor(s):

Marta Rose Shea Represented By Richard J Hassen

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Wesley H Avery

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#26.00 CONT Motion to Withdraw Alleged Admissions To Trustees Requests For Admission

From: 4/25/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18 Also #27 & #28

Docket 49

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Frank X Ruggier

Chapter 7

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#27.00 CONT Motion for Summary Judgment Against Defendant Carolina Villalobos Navarro

From: 4/25/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18 Also #26 & #28

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

4/25/18

BACKGROUND

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

DISCUSSION

Violation of Discharge Injunction

As a preliminary matter, Defendant argues that because she obtained her own discharge in January, the continuation of this proceeding violates her discharge injunction. Specifically, Defendant argues that her discharge extinguishes her personal liability and that Trustee’s complaint seeks avoidance of the transfer and recovery of the property or its value. Defendant’s opposition states:

Notwithstanding his heightened knowledge of the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and bankruptcy jurisprudence, the Trustee has pursued the same claims and remedies against Defendant after her discharge was granted, relieving her of any personal liability on account of the Trustee’s alleged claims and barring the Trustee from obtaining relief in this case. For example, the Trustee seeks judgment on his Fifth Claim, which as pled in the Complaint, alleges that "Plaintiff is entitled to recovery the Subject Property or its value from the Defendant Pursuant to § 550(a)."
[Dkt. No. 46, pg. 12-13].

Defendant’s argument is misleading and lacks merit. Regardless of the relief requested in the complaint, which was filed before Defendant obtained a discharge, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment has dropped the reference to "or its value" and only seeks recovery of the subject property. Nothing in the motion for summary judgment seeks to enforce a personal liability of the Defendant. Therefore, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument.
Motion for Summary Judgment

Summary judgment should be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(c) (incorporated by FED. R.
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7
BANKR. P. 7056).

The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party shows the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and identify facts that show a genuine issue for trial. See id. at 324; see also FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 56(e). The court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). All reasonable doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of fact should be resolved against the moving party. See id.

If the moving party meets its initial burden, the non-moving party must set forth, by affidavit or as otherwise provided in Rule 56, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. The non-moving party, however, "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material fact…." Matsushita Electrical Industry Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-587 (1986).

A fact is material if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute about a material fact is genuine "if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Id.

Plaintiff requests summary judgment on the second claim for relief (avoidance of constructively fraudulent transfer) and the fifth claim for relief (recovery of avoided transfer). 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B) states, in pertinent part:

(a)(1) The trustee may avoid any transfer (including any transfer to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) of an interest of the debtor in property, or any obligation (including any obligation to or for the benefit of an insider under an employment contract) incurred by the debtor, that was made or incurred on or within 2 years before the date of the filing of the petition, if the debtor voluntarily or involuntarily --

(B)(i) received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for such transfer or obligation; and

(ii)(I) was insolvent on the date that such transfer was made or such obligation was incurred, or became insolvent as a result of such
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez
transfer or obligation

Chapter 7

Defendant does not dispute that there was a transfer of an interest of property within 2 years before the petition date. Defendant does, however, dispute the satisfaction of the other two elements, arguing that Defendant received reasonably equivalent value and was not rendered insolvent by the subject transfer. See generally In re Fruehauf Trailer Corp., 444 F.3d 203, 210 (3rd Cir. 2006); In re Southern Textile Knitters, 65 Fed. Appx. 426, 436 (4th Cir. 2003) (outlining elements of § 548(a)(1)(B) action).

Regarding the requirement that reasonably equivalent value have been provided, Plaintiff asserts that the grant deed reflects that the transfer was a "bonafide gift and the grantor received nothing in return." In her opposition, Defendant argues that the language of the grant deed is inaccurate, and that she offered value in a variety of ways. Specifically, Defendant contends that she was a co-signer for the refinancing and "also provided consideration by contributing her wages to pay for household expenses and by providing domestic labor including cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, and running the parties’ household." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 17, lines 7-9]. With regard to the language on the grant deed, Defendant states that:

The Grant Deed was not prepared by Debtor or Defendant. Debtor and Defendant correctly advised the loan officer who handled the refinancing that Defendant was not paying cash to Debtor for her one-half interest. For this reason, Debtor and Defendant believe the loan officer or escrow agent who prepared the Grant Deed noted on the document that the Transfer was a gift.
[Dkt. No. 46, pg. 5, lines 1-5].

In the reply, Plaintiff contends that "[a]fter first stating that it was a gift and nothing was received, the Debtor and Defendant should be estopped from now claiming it was not a gift and reasonably equivalent value was provided for the Subject Transfer." [Dkt. No. 51, pg. 4, lines 13-15].

The Court concludes that the parol evidence rule applies here to preclude the consideration of evidence which contradicts the plain and unambiguous language of the deed. See generally In re Khalil, 2014 WL 1725811 at *6-11 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2014) (collecting cases providing comprehensive analysis of the parol evidence rule in the context of grant deeds deed). As was noted in Khalil:
If there is no ambiguity on the face of the document, and no reference to
2:00 PM
CONT... Jose Antonio Hernandez Chapter 7
information or terms in the recorded document or from the circumstances of
the conveyance that would lead a bona fide purchaser to inquire as to the intent and meaning of the instrument, then the bona fide purchaser is entitled to rely on the written record and is not charged with or bound by unstated meanings or by secret or collateral agreements that add to or alter the written record.

Id. at *10. While the above quotation is in the context of ownership interests in real property, rather than the nature of consideration, or lack thereof, in connection with a grant deed, the same underlying principle is applicable: "third parties, including the trustee and the estate’s creditors, must be able to rely on the terms of recorded deed." Id. at *11. See also id. at *10 ("As a general rule, when any ambiguity is not evident from the face of the instrument (i.e., a "latent" ambiguity), the deed must be construed solely from an analysis of the plain meaning of the document itself, and extrinsic evidence is not admissible."); Laux v. Freed, 53 Cal. 2d. 512, 523 (Cal. 1960) ("[I]f the language of a deed is plain, certain and unambiguous, neither parol evidence nor surrounding facts and circumstances will be considered to add to, detract from, or vary its terms.").

Regarding the insolvency requirement, Plaintiff first argues that given the absence of reasonably equivalent value, Debtor’s insolvency as a result of the transfer should be assumed; Plaintiff cites United States v. Mazzeo, 245 B.R. 435, 441 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). The Court declines to make such a presumption. The case cited by Plaintiff, and the related case law, deals with fraudulent transfer provisions under New York state law. See, e.g., Kim v. Ji Sung Yoo, 2017 WL 4382078 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (noting presumption and collecting cases). No such burden shifting framework, however, exists under the Bankruptcy Code. See 5 COLLIER’S ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 548.11[2] (16th ed. 2017) ("Under state law and the UFTA (and presumably the UVTA), a well- recognized exception permits the court to infer a proscribed financial state once the plaintiff has shown a lack of fair consideration or a lack of reasonably equivalent value. This shift should not apply to cases brought under section 548.") (footnotes omitted); see also In re Galbreath, 286 B.R. 185, 197 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2002) ("The burden for proving constructive fraud falls on the trustee who must show by a preponderance of the evidence that all requirements set out in § 548(a)(1)(B) have been met.")

Plaintiff next argues that Debtor’s insolvency can be established through a review of the schedules. Essentially, Plaintiff argues that the schedules indicate that Debtor was insolvent as of the petition date, and that the Court can work backwards to conclude that Debtor was insolvent on the date of the transfer. As one bankruptcy court has stated:
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Since insolvency at a given point in time is often difficult to demonstrate by direct proof, courts permit the trustee to show that the debtor was insolvent at one point in time and then prove that the same condition existed at the time of the subject transfer. This method of proof has been labeled "retrojection," but

Chapter 7
it applies equally to situations in which the trustee starts at a point in time prior to the transfer. When the trustee chooses to use this method of proof it is essential that the trustee be able to show the absence of any substantial or radical changes in the assets or liabilities of the bankruptcy between the retrojection dates.

In re R. Purbeck & Assocs., Ltd., 27 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1983) (footnotes and quotation omitted). Plaintiff argues that the schedules reflect that Debtor had no meaningful unexempt assets as of the petition date while much of Debtor’s unsecured debt was identified as having been incurred prior to the date of the transfer.
Furthermore, Debtor’s statement of financial affairs does not disclose any significant transfers of property between the date of the subject transfer and the petition date.

In Defendant’s opposition, she appears to contend that Debtor’s outstanding debt on the date of the subject transfer was $210,282 and that Debtor’s assets were valued at approximately $224,000. The Court notes that these assertions do not demonstrate solvency – they demonstrate insolvency as that term is defined in the Code. 11 U.S.C.
§ 101(32)(A)(ii) exempts from the solvency requirement property which may be exempt under § 522. The assets listed in Debtor’s schedules, and in Defendant’s opposition, all appear to be assets capable of being exempted under § 522, thereby rendering Defendant statutorily insolvent. Even ignoring that fact, however, Defendant’s opposition indicates that Debtor had $53,186 in equity in the property; transferring a 50% interest in the property would have rendered Debtor insolvent even before removing property which can be exempted. As a result, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has demonstrated there is no genuine dispute regarding Debtor’s insolvency on the date of the subject transfer.
Recovery

Plaintiff also seeks recovery of the subject property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550. 11
U.S.C. § 550(a)(1) states:
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, to the extent that a transfer is avoided under section 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 553(b), or 724(a) of this title,
2:00 PM
CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez
the trustee may recover, for the benefit of the estate, the property transferred, or, if the court so orders, the value of such property, from –
1. the initial transferee of such transfer or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made
  
  Chapter 7
  
  Defendant opposes the requested recovery, although the legal basis for the opposition is less than clear. Defendant argues that "annulment of the Transfer would have the effect of returning the Property to a single ownership since Debtor was the sole owner. Therefore, recovery of the Transfer is unnecessary and provides no benefit to the estate." [Dkt. No. 46, pg. 18, lines 15-17]. The Court’s interpretation of the Plaintiff’s request is that Plaintiff is requesting an order indicating that the Property has retained to single ownership (the bankruptcy estate). Therefore, it does not appear there is really any legal dispute here, semantical differences aside.
Withdrawal of Admissions

TENTATIVE RULING

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

2:00 PM

CONT...

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier

2:00 PM

6:16-13311

Jose Antonio Hernandez

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01176 Simons v. Navarro

#28.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint to Avoid and Recover Fraudulent Transfer

From: 9/7/16, 11/9/16, 1/11/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/17/17, 6/7/17, 7/26/17, 9/27/17, 11/29/17, 1/10/18, 4/25/18, 5/16/18, 7/25/18

Also #26 & #27 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Hernandez Represented By

Jessica De Anda Leon

Defendant(s):

Carolina Villalobos Navarro Represented By Christopher J Langley

Plaintiff(s):

Larry D Simons Represented By Frank X Ruggier

Trustee(s):

Larry D Simons (TR) Represented By Frank X Ruggier

11:00 AM

6:18-17351

Melanie Tarhuni

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:18-01181 Tarhuni v. Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC et al

#1.00 CONT Status Conference RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18-ap-01181. Complaint by Melanie Tarhuni against Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC , Loancare LLC . (Fee Not Required). Nature of Suit: (21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)) ,(71 (Injunctive relief - reinstatement of stay)) ,(91 (Declaratory judgment))

From: 11/29/18 EH

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Loancare LLC Represented By Jonathan C Cahill

Plaintiff(s):

Melanie Tarhuni Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13 #2.00 CONT Motion to (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No. 6:17-ap-01187 MH, which is a Conflict of Interest; (3) Request for an Accounting and Claim Numbers on any Unsecured Debts Rule 71 in Adversary Proceeding Case No 6:17-ap-01187 MH and Chapter 13 Case No 6:16-bk-16720 MH; (4) Memorandum of Points and Authorities; (5) Declaration of Luevina Henry

CASE DISMISSED 7/25/18

From: 10/25/18, 12/6/18 EH

Docket 187

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#3.00 CONT Motion to vacate (1) Vacate Dismissal and Set Aside Trustee Rod Danielson's Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 Order and Dismissal for no Jurisdiction; (2) Trustee Rod Danielson has No Standing to Bring Motion to Dismiss Chapter 13 as he was sued in the Adversary Proceeding Case No.

From: 10/25/18, 12/6/18 Also #4

Docket 110

* VACATED * REASON: Reason: Duplicate Motion filed in Main Case

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

11:00 AM

CONT...

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Tavares Pro Se

Movant(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Adv#: 6:17-01187 Henry v. Real Time Resolutions Inc et al

#4.00 CONT Status Conference on Complaint fld 8-25-17 - Dischargeability, willful and malicious injury, validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property, injunctive relief

From: 11/16/17, 11/1/18, 12/20/18 Also #3

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Luevina Henry Pro Se

Defendant(s):

Real Time Resolutions Inc Represented By Renee M Parker

THE BANK OF NEW YORK Represented By Renee M Parker

Riverside County Sheriff Represented By Ronak N Patel

Tavares Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Luevina Henry Pro Se

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:16-14440

Michael Douglas Guerino and Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino

Chapter 13 #5.00 Motion to Vacate Dismissal Based on Mistake, Inadvertance or Neglect and to Reinstate Case

Docket 70

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats

Joint Debtor(s):

Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats

Movant(s):

Michael Douglas Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats Joseph M Hoats Joseph M Hoats

Xochitl Rodriguez Guerino Represented By Joseph M Hoats Joseph M Hoats Joseph M Hoats

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13 #6.00 Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments with Declaration of Scott Patrick Williams

Also #7 EH

Docket 126

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-10619

Scott Patrick Williams and Lisa Ann Williams

Chapter 13 #7.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/15/18

Also #6 EH

Docket 116

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Scott Patrick Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Joint Debtor(s):

Lisa Ann Williams Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:17-14972

Jude Okwor

Chapter 13 #8.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18, 11/29/18 EH

Docket 33

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jude Okwor Represented By

Javier H Castillo

Movant(s):

Jude Okwor Represented By

Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-12622

Karen Jannette Rimola

Chapter 13 #9.00 CONT Motion under Local Bankruptcy Rule 3015-1 (n) and (w) to modify plan or suspend plan payments

From: 11/15/18 EH

Docket 27

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Karen Jannette Rimola Represented By Norma Duenas

Movant(s):

Karen Jannette Rimola Represented By Norma Duenas Norma Duenas

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-13092

Mark Irwin Barule

Chapter 13 #10.00 Application for Compensation for Additional Fees and Related Expenses in a Pending Chapter 13 Case Subject to a Rights and Responsibilities Agreement (RARA) with attached Declaration, Exhibit A and Proof of Service for Summer M Shaw, Debtor's Attorney, Period: 5/7/2018 to 6/6/2018, Fee: $1645.00, Expenses: $0.

Docket 38

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Mark Irwin Barule Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Movant(s):

Mark Irwin Barule Represented By Summer M Shaw Jenny L Doling

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16366

Jose Luis Tafoya

Chapter 13 #11.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Luis Tafoya Represented By Clay E Presley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-16791

Alisha Shanea Reese

Chapter 7 #12.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE CONVERTED TO CHAPTER 7 ON 11/6/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Alisha Shanea Reese Represented By Suzette Douglas

Trustee(s):

Robert Whitmore (TR) Represented By Caroline Djang

11:00 AM

6:18-16804

Adam Brian Britt and Kenya Lashawn Britt

Chapter 13 #13.00 CONT Motion for Authority to Incur Debt (Ch 13) From: 11/15/18

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Adam Brian Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Joint Debtor(s):

Kenya Lashawn Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Movant(s):

Adam Brian Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Kenya Lashawn Britt Represented By Scott Kosner

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17307

Rita Denise Pappalardo and Steven Joseph Pappalardo

Chapter 13 #14.00 Motion RE: Objection to Claim Number 17 by Claimant Citibank, N.A. EH

Docket 26

Tentative Ruling:

TENTATIVE RULING

The bar date for filing claims in the case of Rita and Steven Pappalardo (collectively, "Debtors") was November 6, 2018. On November 7, 2018, Claim No. 17 was filed by Citibank, N.A. The late filing of the claim prompted Debtors to file the instant Objection to Claim. The proof of service indicates that service on Citibank was consistent with FRBP 7004 and Citibank has failed to file opposition. Based on Citibank’s failure to file opposition or to otherwise seek an order authorizing the late filing of the claim, the Court is inclined to SUSTAIN the Objection.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Rita Denise Pappalardo Represented By Aaron Lloyd

Joint Debtor(s):

Steven Joseph Pappalardo Represented By Aaron Lloyd

Movant(s):

Rita Denise Pappalardo Represented By Aaron Lloyd Aaron Lloyd

Steven Joseph Pappalardo Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Trustee(s):

Rita Denise Pappalardo and Steven Joseph Pappalardo

Aaron Lloyd Aaron Lloyd

Chapter 13

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:15-16710

Sean Kirkpatrick

Chapter 13 #15.00 CONT Motion For Sanctions for Violation of the Automatic Stay From: 12/6/18

Docket 65

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 1/17/19 AT 11:00 A.M.

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sean Kirkpatrick Represented By Javier H Castillo

Movant(s):

Sean Kirkpatrick Represented By Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo Javier H Castillo

Trustee(s):

Rod (MJ) Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-17624

Jose Antonio Velasco and Lilian Micaela Velasco

Chapter 13 #16.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai

Joint Debtor(s):

Lilian Micaela Velasco Represented By Danny K Agai

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18002

Jennifer Romero

Chapter 13 #17.00 CONT Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan From: 11/15/18

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jennifer Romero Represented By James T Lillard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18660

Jeffrey Scott Weedon

Chapter 13 #18.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeffrey Scott Weedon Represented By

Ramiro Flores Munoz

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18676

Jose Antonio Contreras and Mayra Lorena Contreras

Chapter 13 #19.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose Antonio Contreras Represented By A Mina Tran

Party Information

Nicolas Canello Represented By Terrence Fantauzzi

Jill Cathleen Watson Represented By Robert W Ripley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18794

Roy Morales and Lalani Dee Morales

Chapter 13 #29.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Roy Morales Represented By

Robert W Ripley

Joint Debtor(s):

Lalani Dee Morales Represented By Robert W Ripley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18801

Jon Patrick Park

Chapter 13 #30.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/5/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jon Patrick Park Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18809

Heinrich Franz Brinkmann

Chapter 13 #31.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Heinrich Franz Brinkmann Represented By Stephen H Darrow

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18810

Jennifer Marie Silva

Chapter 13 #32.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/28/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Party Information

Humberto Camacho Jr Represented By Christian N. Cooper

Joint Debtor(s):

Sarah Camacho Represented By Christian N. Cooper

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18835

Peter W Fournier and Leslie Fournier

Chapter 13 #36.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/5/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Peter W Fournier Represented By Laleh Ensafi

Joint Debtor(s):

Leslie Fournier Represented By Laleh Ensafi

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18846

Jose L. Ferrer and Maria Ferrer

Chapter 13 #37.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose L. Ferrer Represented By

Antonio John Ibarra

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Ferrer Represented By

Antonio John Ibarra

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18847

Jennifer Lee Minkalis

Chapter 13 #38.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jennifer Lee Minkalis Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18859

Lawrence Sendejas, Jr. and Denise Sendejas

Chapter 13 #39.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Lawrence Sendejas Jr. Represented By

Raj T Wadhwani

Joint Debtor(s):

Denise Sendejas Represented By

Raj T Wadhwani

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18869

Arturo Garcia, Jr.

Chapter 13 #40.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Arturo Garcia Jr. Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-18885

Terry E Crossley and Janell Crossley

Chapter 13 #41.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Terry E Crossley Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19015

Sheila Malone

Chapter 13 #48.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Sheila Malone Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19027

Wendy Ramirez

Chapter 13 #49.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Wendy Ramirez Represented By Brian J Soo-Hoo

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19040

Joel O. Romano and Maria Isabel C. Romano

Chapter 13 #50.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joel O. Romano Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Joint Debtor(s):

Maria Isabel C. Romano Represented By Patricia M Ashcraft

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19044

Kimberly Ida McGee Hager

Chapter 13 #51.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Kimberly Ida McGee Hager Represented By Chris A Mullen

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19067

Denise Valencia

Chapter 13 #52.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 11/13/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Denise Valencia Pro Se

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19093

Yolanda Williams

Chapter 13 #53.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Yolanda Williams Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19096

Nathaniel Russell Williams

Chapter 13 #54.00 Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan EH

Docket 0

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Nathaniel Russell Williams Represented By Dina Farhat

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19233

Yair Salvador Carranza Contreras

Chapter 13 #55.00 Motion for Order Determining Value of Collateral re: 2017 Dodge Ram 2500 Mega Cab

Docket 12

Tentative Ruling:

12/19/2018

BACKGROUND

On October 31, 2018, Yair Contreras ("Debtor") filed their petition for chapter 13 relief. Among the assets of the estate is a 2017 Dodge RAM (the "RAM"). On November 19, 2018, the Debtor filed his Motion to Value the RAM ("Motion"). No opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

The Debtor asserts that the RAM’s value, and thus its secured portion, should be determined to be $40,175, with an unsecured deficiency claim for $9,276. In support, the Debtor has submitted a NADA Guide Report. Service of the Motion was proper and Wells Fargo has filed no opposition or objection to the valuation.

Separately, the Court notes that although Wells Fargo has not filed a proof of claim, the bar date has not yet lapsed.

11:00 AM

CONT...

Yair Salvador Carranza Contreras

Chapter 13

TENTATIVE RULING

For the foregoing reasons, the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion, with the exception that the amount of the unsecured portion of the claim shall be controlled by a filed proof of claim consistent with the local rules in the event that Wells Fargo timely files a proof of claim.

APPEARANCES WAIVED. Movant to lodge an order within 7 days.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Yair Salvador Carranza Contreras Represented By

Lionel E Giron

Movant(s):

Yair Salvador Carranza Contreras Represented By

Lionel E Giron Lionel E Giron

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-19696

Corinthia A. Williams

Chapter 13 #56.00 CONT Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Real Property

MOVANT: CORINTHIA A. WILLIAMS

From: 11/29/18 EH

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

11/29/2018

The evidence that the tax issue which resulted in the dismissal of the Debtor’s second case is insufficient. At minimum, the Debtor should have provided a declaration of the tax preparer she hired to give the Court an opinion regarding the likelihood that the IRS would again file a claim of a similar amount, which would render the Debtor’s case infeasible.

As to service, the Order Setting Hearing on Shortened time required that a Written Notice of the Hearing AND a copy of the Court’s Order Setting the Hearing be sent to the creditors indicated. Instead, Docket No. 15 is a stand-alone proof of service which indicates that the Order and a Notice of Hearing were mailed to the foreclosing creditor. However, Docket reflects a failure by Debtor to file a Notice of Hearing indicating the date, time and place of the hearing. The stand-alone proof of service is insufficient for the Court to have certainty that a Notice of Hearing which satisfies due process requirements was mailed to the foreclosing creditor.

As such, the tentative ruling is to DENY the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

11:00 AM

CONT...

Debtor(s):

Corinthia A. Williams

Chapter 13

Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley

Movant(s):

Corinthia A. Williams Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-20002

Tanyua Alicia Gates-Holmes

Chapter 13 #57.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 23631 Rhea Dr, Moreno Valley, CA 92557

MOVANT: TANYUA ALICIA GATES-HOLMES

Docket 10

Tentative Ruling:

12/20/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

The Debtor’s prior chapter 13 plan depended on her earning overtime income. The Debtor indicates that her overtime pay was reduced which caused her to fall behind on her plan payments. In support of this Motion, the Debtor asserts she has now rented a room in her home to enable her to make up for the lost income. Attached to the Motion as Exhibit "E" is a rental agreement for the Debtor’s new tenant that indicates Debtor will be paid $850 per month in rental income to supplement her nursing income. The increase in income is reflected in the Debtor’s schedules and appears to significantly make up the shortfall that resulted in the prior dismissal. For these reasons, the Court finds that the Debtor has overcome the presumption that the instant case was not filed in good faith.

The Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Tanyua Alicia Gates-Holmes Represented By John F Brady

11:00 AM

CONT...

Movant(s):

Tanyua Alicia Gates-Holmes

Chapter 13

Tanyua Alicia Gates-Holmes Represented By John F Brady John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-20165

Pablo Cornejo

Chapter 13 #58.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate Residence

MOVANT: PABLO CORNEJO

Docket 7

Tentative Ruling:

12/20/2018

The case was dismissed at the confirmation hearing for the following reasons:

No Post-Petition Secured Debt Payment History Declaration was filed [LBR 3015-1(M)].
The Statement of Related Cases did not list all prior bankruptcy cases.
No proof of income from all sources was provided 7 days before 341(a) or at all [LBR 3015-1(c)(3)].
Business reporting requirements for self-employed Debtors were not complied with:
- [LBR 3015-1(c)(4)]: No 6 months of bank statements for all personal and business bank accounts were provided, (b) Debtor testified that he works from home, but his business income and expense statements include personal expenses that should be listed on Schedule J (utilities, car payment, car insurance, meals).
Debtor testified he owes delinquent income taxes to the IRS and FTB, but such debts were listed on Schedule E, and the IRS and FTB were not served with the plan.
Debtor's Schedules listed a 2015 Chevy Camaro, but the plan made no provision for this car and no car payment was deducted from Schedule J (Trustee needed to see a copy of the auto purchase contract to determine the monthly payment amount and when it will be paid off).
The notice of 341a and confirmation hearings had the wrong objection due

11:00 AM

CONT...

Pablo Cornejo

date, and no service list is attached to the proof of service.

The Statement of Compensation said that the balance of the attorney's fees owed is $2,500 but the Plan states the balance owed is $3,500.

Chapter 13

The Motion makes a vague assertion that the Debtor’s counsel failed to file proper documents. The explanation provided is woefully inadequate to address the numerous failures indicated by the Trustee in his objections to confirmation. In particular, if the Debtor’s counsel accepts fault for the above-referenced failings, there should simultaneously be an explanation of how the Debtor’s counsel shall redress the problems raised by his substandard handling of the prior case. Additionally, the Motion does not actually identify the prior cases dismissed during the prior year. The Court’s docket reflects at least one case. However, the Debtor has checked boxes indicating alternately that he is seeking to "impose" and "continue" the stay.

In addition to the foregoing, it appears that secured creditors were not filed in accordance with FRBP 7004 in that they were not served to the attention of an officer and were not served via certified mail.

As such the Court is inclined to DENY the Motion. APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Pablo Cornejo Represented By Ivan Trahan

Movant(s):

Pablo Cornejo Represented By Ivan Trahan

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:00 AM

6:18-20308

Joseph Liebgott, IV and Robby Jean Harrison

Chapter 13 #59.00 Notice of Motion and Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing a Stay or Continuing the Automatic Stay as the Court Deems Appropriate 35694 Sierra Lane Yucaipa, CA 92399-0000

MOVANT: JOSEPH LIEBGOTT IV & ROBBY JEAN HARRISON

Docket 9

Tentative Ruling:

12/20/2018

Service: Proper Opposition: None

The Debtor Wife has provided evidence that her prior case was dismissed because she had surgery which resulted in her being out of work for four months. Based on the Debtor’s declaration that she has now returned to work, the Court finds that the Debtor has overcome the presumption that the case was not filed in good faith and the Court is inclined to GRANT the Motion.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joseph Liebgott IV Represented By John F Brady

Joint Debtor(s):

Robby Jean Harrison Represented By John F Brady

Movant(s):

Joseph Liebgott IV Represented By

11:00 AM

CONT...

Joseph Liebgott, IV and Robby Jean Harrison

John F Brady

Chapter 13

Robby Jean Harrison Represented By John F Brady

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-10795

Agnes Smith

Chapter 13 #60.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency From: 12/6/18

Docket 109

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/18/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Agnes Smith Represented By

James T Lillard

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-15520

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis

Chapter 13 #61.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 54

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jeremiah Johnson Nellis Represented By Carey C Pickford

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-20007

Celia Baeza

Chapter 13 #62.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 10/18/18, 11/8/18

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Celia Baeza Represented By

Todd B Becker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:14-23388

Jose N Recinos and Patricia Recinos

Chapter 13 #63.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/29/18

Docket 304

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Jose N Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Joint Debtor(s):

Patricia Recinos Represented By Michael Smith Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-19037

Justin Sloan Harvey

Chapter 13 #64.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 91

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Justin Sloan Harvey Represented By Jenny L Doling Summer M Shaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:15-22294

Jonathan William Nicastro

Chapter 13 #65.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 140

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Jonathan William Nicastro Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-14987

Susana Olga Corona

Chapter 13 #66.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 125

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Susana Olga Corona Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-16909

Edward Edmund Zozaya and Georgia Parrilla Zozaya

Chapter 13 #67.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/29/18

Docket 230

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Edward Edmund Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Georgia Parrilla Zozaya Represented By Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-17911

Elizabeth T Baker

Chapter 13 #68.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 144

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION FILED 12/10/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Elizabeth T Baker Represented By Nancy Korompis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18082

Joseph John Vargas and Lydia Vargas

Chapter 13 #69.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/8/18, 11/29/18

Docket 85

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joseph John Vargas Represented By Dana Travis

Joint Debtor(s):

Lydia Vargas Represented By

Dana Travis

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:16-18430

Isaias Melo and Rosa Melo

Chapter 13 #70.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 73

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Isaias Melo Represented By

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Bryan D. Chriss Represented By Michael Smith Cynthia L Gibson Sundee M Teeple

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14157

Joe Wallace Brown and Yolanda Denise Moore

Chapter 13 #76.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 38

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 11/30/18

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joe Wallace Brown Represented By Christopher J Langley

Joint Debtor(s):

Yolanda Denise Moore Represented By Christopher J Langley

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14549

Denice Laree Grimes and Derrick Gregory Grimes

Chapter 13 #77.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 11/8/18

Docket 42

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Denice Laree Grimes Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Joint Debtor(s):

Derrick Gregory Grimes Represented By

M Wayne Tucker

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14619

Candice Maria Borrego

Chapter 13 #78.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 67

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Candice Maria Borrego Represented By Andy C Warshaw

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:17-14789

Sadia Sohail

Chapter 13 #79.00 CONT Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case From: 7/23/18, 11/8/18, 11/29/18

Docket 57

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Party Information

Jaime Villalobos Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Joint Debtor(s):

Jennifer Villalobos Represented By

Rabin J Pournazarian

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10170

Vernita Goodwin

Chapter 13 #84.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case EH

Docket 66

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Vernita Goodwin Represented By Steven A Alpert

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

11:01 AM

6:18-10636

Alejandro J. Casillas and Patricia Casillas

Chapter 13 #85.00 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss Case re Delinquency EH

Docket 35

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Amanuel Montrell Bradberry Represented By Gary S Saunders

Joint Debtor(s):

Debtor(s):

Alejandro Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Joint Debtor(s):

Karla Guillen Represented By Neil R Hedtke

Trustee(s):

Rod Danielson (TR) Pro Se

12:30 PM

6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11 #92.00 Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Motion to Approve Compromise of Disputes Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Precedure 9019

Also #93 & #93.1 EH

Docket 127

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

12:30 PM

6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11 #93.00 Debtor and Debtor in Possession's Motion for Order Authorizing Assumption of Executory Contract Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sect 365(a)

Also #92 & #93.1 EH

Docket 129

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

Movant(s):

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

12:30 PM

6:18-15841

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California corporation

Chapter 11 #93.10 CONT Order (1) Setting Scheduling Hearing And Case Management Conference And (2) Requiring Status Report

From: 8/28/18, 9/25/18, 11/27/18, 12/19/18

Also #92 & #93 EH

Docket 5

Tentative Ruling:

12/19/2018

All parties have authorization to appear telephonically for the 12/19/2018 Status Conference.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

LA Steel Services, Inc., a California Represented By

James C Bastian Jr Melissa Davis Lowe

1:00 PM

6:14-16813

M. A. Tabor

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:16-01128 Frealy v. Trotochau et al

#94.00 CONT Application and Order for Appearance and Examination From: 12/5/18, 12/11/18

Docket 53

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

M. A. Tabor Represented By

Judith Runyon

Defendant(s):

Robin Sherrie Trotochau Pro Se

Pacific Mortgage Exchange, Inc. Represented By

Leib M Lerner

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Plaintiff(s):

Todd A. Frealy Represented By Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By

1:00 PM

CONT...

M. A. Tabor

Anthony A Friedman Lindsey L Smith

Chapter 7

1:00 PM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7 #95.00 CONT Motion of Chapter 7 Trustee to Approve Compromise of Controversy From: 12/5/18, 12/11/18

Docket 60

Tentative Ruling:

12/11/18

BACKGROUND

On February 6, 2018, Creditor removed certain state court litigation to bankruptcy court. The state court litigation contained causes of action for: (1) breach of contract;

fraud; (3) unjust enrichment; (4) constructive trust; and (5) declaratory relief. On June 29, 2018, Creditor filed a complaint to determine dischargeability and to deny Debtor a discharge.

On November 8, 2018, Trustee filed a motion to approve compromise. No opposition to the motion has been filed.
1:00 PM
CONT...

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7
The dispute between Creditor and Debtor relates to a loan made by Creditor to Debtor in 2012 for the total amount of $225,000. According to the instant motion, the purpose of the loan was for Debtor to purchase certain real property located in Moreno Valley, California (the "Property"). Creditor asserts that Debtor breached the loan agreement by failing to provide Creditor with a deed of trust, and that, as a result, the Property is subject to a constructive trust in favor of Creditor. The compromise motion also deals with potential avoidance actions against Gabriela Diaz.

The compromise under consideration contains the following components. First, Creditor shall obtain a stipulated judgment in the removed action, adjudicating that the Property is subject to a constructive trust and that Creditor is entitled to a judgment in the amount of $318,778.12. Second, Trustee shall sell the Property. The first $303,000 of the sale proceeds would be payable to Creditor1, while any amount exceeding $303,000 would be divided so that the bankruptcy estate receives 30% and Creditor receives 70%.2 Third, Trustee would assign the potential avoidance actions against Gabriela Diaz to Creditor, with any net recoveries to be distributed 30% to the bankruptcy estate and 70% to Creditor. The compromise motion also contemplates that Creditor will object to Debtor’s homestead exemption.

DISCUSSION

FED. R. BANKR. P. Rule 9019 provides that:

On motion by the trustee and after notice and a hearing, the court may approve a compromise or settlement. Notice shall be given to creditors, the United States trustee, the debtor, and indenture trustees as provided in Rule 2002 and to any other entity as the court may direct.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have previously outlined the factors to be considered in approving a compromise pursuant to Rule 9019: (1) the probability of success in the litigation; (2) the difficulties to be encountered in the matter of
1:00 PM
CONT...

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7
collection; (3) the complexity, expense, inconvenience and delay of litigation; and (4) the interest of creditors with deference to their reasonable. See In re A&C Props., 784 F.2d 1377, 1381 (9th Cir. 1986). The listed factors assist the Court in determining "the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of a proposed settlement agreement." Id.

There are a variety of material details which are not adequately addressed in the compromise motion under consideration, hindering the Court’s review of the fairness and reasonableness of the compromise These issues are enumerated below:
1. While the motion does not provide the relevant information, the Court takes judicial notice of Schedule A [Dkt. No. 19] and Schedule C [Dkt. No. 21]; these schedules indicate that Debtor identified the Property as having a fair market value of $303,000 and claimed an exemption in the amount of
  $100,000. If these figures are correct, and subject to the issue listed below, it would appear any recovery by the estate from the sale of the Property would be contingent on a successful objection to Debtor’s homestead exemption, which has not yet been filed nor been detailed in the instant motion.
2. It is unclear from the motion, but to the extent that the motion attempts to pay unsecured creditors prior to satisfying Debtor’s homestead exemption, such approach is impermissible. While the settlement agreement frames the approach as paying the HLE lien, there is, quite simply, no HLE lien and, to the extent that Creditor is offering a carve-out of $25,000, the compromise does not articulate a legal basis by which the such amounts could be used to pay unsecured creditors prior to satisfying the homestead exemption.
3. It appears that Creditor may be receiving a small windfall from the proposed compromise, which is not adequately explained or detailed. The Court takes judicial notice of the removed state court complaint and notes that Creditor requested a judgment of $252,516.94. The Court also takes judicial notice of the claims register, and notes that Creditor filed an unsecured claim on April 13, 2018, in the amount of $301,167.85 ("Claim 2"). Based on the record before the Court, it appears that the proposed compromise transforms Claim 2 into a secured claim and increases the claim amount by approximately
  $17,000. Additionally, the proposed compromise would further increase Creditor’s recovery depending upon the sale price of the Property or success in the potential avoidance actions.
  1:00 PM
  CONT...
  
  Joshua Cord Richardson
4. The consideration the estate is receiving from this compromise, on the other hand, is unclear and speculative, given that any recovery by the estate appears to be conditioned on a successful objection to Debtor’s homestead exemption,

Chapter 7

depends upon the sale price of the Property, which has not been detailed in the motion, and also depends upon the recovery in the potential avoidance actions, which has not been described at all.

On the record before the Court, the Court is simply unable to ascertain the fairness or reasonableness of the proposed compromise.

TENTATIVE RULING

Parties to address the issues above, and the Court may CONTINUE the matter for supplemental briefing.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

Party Information

Debtor(s):

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Movant(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

1:00 PM

6:17-17749

Joshua Cord Richardson

Chapter 7

Adv#: 6:18-01035 Sonnenfeld v. Richardson

#96.00 CONT Status Conference re Notice of Removal RE: [1] Adversary case 6:18- ap-01035. Complaint by Cleo Sonnenfeld against Joshua C Richardson. Case No. RIC 1700456]; Attachments: # 1 Notice of Status Conference re Removal of Action Nature of Suit: 01 - Determination of removed claim or cause

From: 3/28/18, 6/13/18, 7/25/18, 10/24/18, 12/19/18

Docket 1

Tentative Ruling:

- NONE LISTED -

Debtor(s):

Party Information

Joshua Cord Richardson Represented By Amid Bahadori

Defendant(s):

Joshua C Richardson Pro Se

Plaintiff(s):

Cleo Sonnenfeld Represented By Laila Masud

D Edward Hays

Trustee(s):

Todd A. Frealy (TR) Represented By Anthony A Friedman

Trustee Fees:	$3,695.78
Trustee Expenses:	$19.81
Special Counsel Fees:	$11,193.96
Special Counsel Costs:	$3,743.20
Trustee GC Fees:	$5,849.36
Trustee GC Costs:	$1,217.78

Sale Price …	$655,000
Tax encumbrances (estimated) …	$46,268.52
Unpaid postpetition property insurance fees …	$2,033.30

Trustee Fees:	$8,955.77
Trustee Expenses:	$40
Attorneys Fees:	$11,024
Attorneys Expenses:	$448.28
Accountant Fees:	$1,863

Trustee Fees:	$ 32,791.67
Trustee Expenses:	$ 532.24
Attorney Fees:	$29,892
Attorney Costs:	$529.30
Accountant Fees:	$3,600
Accountant Costs:	$325.67

State of California	Unknown. Debtor is	Paid in full by August 25,
	currently	2022
	Subject to an audit but
	disputes
	Any net liability

Description	Amount Owed	Treatment
Class 3: General Unsecured	Total Claims:	Paid in full within 72
Claims	$1,590,337.12	months of
	Impaired	Effective Date
		Unclear

Trustee Fees:	$4,750
Trustee Expenses:	$77.98
Attorney Fees:	$15,506.20
Attorney Costs:	$78.70

Trustee Fees:	$ 1,786.27
Trustee Expenses:	$ 44.76
Attorney Fees:	$11,979.97
Attorney Costs:	$316.10

Trustee Fees:	$ 2,000
Trustee Expenses:	$ 47.42
Attorney Fees:	$6,082.50
Attorney Costs:	$418.16

Trustee Fees:	$ 13,520.36
Trustee Expenses:	$ 793.07
Attorney Fees:	$36,610.21
Attorney Costs:	$5,047.77
Accountant Fees:	$1,737.91
Accountant Costs:	$310

Trustee Fees:	$ 2,350
Trustee Expenses:	$ 48.84
Attorney Fees:	$10,000
Attorney Costs:	$0
Accountant Fees:	$1,000 (per flat fee order entered 12/14/17)

Trustee Fees:	$ 3,250
Trustee Expenses:	$ 88.78
Attorney Fees:	$8,960
Attorney Costs:	$141.30

Sale Price	$365,000
Ditech	$189,000
Debtor’s Claim of Exemption	$19,621.59

Attorney Fees:	$ 43,812
Attorney Costs:	$ 2,040.98
Accountant Fees:	$ 18,386.00
Accountant Costs:	$ 191.15
Court Costs:	$ 350.00

Accountant Fees:	$ 5,740.00
Accountant Costs:	$ 78.46
Court Costs:	$350.00

6:17-10113

Abraham Meza, Jr.

Chapter 7

#1.00 Notice of Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation EH

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

6:17-18675

Alma Delia Ramos

Chapter 7

#2.00 Notice of Motion to set aside RE: Order Granting Motion for Relief From Stay Unlawful Detainer 21

Tentative Ruling: 1/3/18

CONT...

Alma Delia Ramos

Chapter 7

Party Information

6:13-26277

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

#3.00 Chapter 7 Trustees Motion for Order Revoking Abandonment of Real Property of the Estate

Tentative Ruling: 1/3/18

CONT... Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

CONT...

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

CONT...

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

CONT... Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

Party Information

CONT...

Charles Frederick Biehl

Chapter 7

6:16-19799

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

#4.00 CONT Status Conference RE: Complaint by John P. Pringle against Walie A. Qadir, Marym Qadir, Najlla Qadir. (Charge To Estate). (Attachments: # 1 Adversary Coversheet) Nature of Suit: (13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other))

*** VACATED *** REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 12/29/17

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

CONT...

Jaison Vally Surace

Chapter 7

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

*** VACATED *** REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

Tentative Ruling:

Party Information

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

6:13-27611

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

#6.00 CONT Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Claims of Plaintiff, Jerry Wang, and to Strike and for a More Definite Statement as to Plaintiff, Revere Financial Corporation

*** VACATED *** REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/20/17

Tentative Ruling:

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Chapter 7

CONT...

Douglas Jay Roger

Party Information

Chapter 7

6:16-16720

Luevina Henry

Chapter 13

#7.00 Motion for Disqualification for Cause Discrimination, Hate Crime (Black), etc., et al against Judge Meredith A. Jury

Tentative Ruling:

* VACATED * REASON: ADVERSARY DISMISSED 12/29/17

* VACATED * REASON: CONTINUED TO 2/28/18 AT 2:00 P.M.

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/20/17

* VACATED * REASON: WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FILED 12/29/17

* VACATED * REASON: ORDER ENTERED 12/5/17

* VACATED * REASON: CASE DISMISSED 12/18/17