Notice OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE AND OF AUTOMATIC

Preview
”.1an“Qt? I ‘27- I 3-724 CAZ HASHEMI, State Bar No. 210239 BENJAMIN M. CROSSON, State Bar No. 247560 . DORU GAVRIL, State Bar No. 282309 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI FEEEB SAN MATEO COUNTY Professional Corporation. ‘650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 943 04-1050 OOOONONUl-QWNI—i Telephone: (650) 493-9300 Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 Email: chashemi@wsgr.com bcrosson@wsgr.com dgavril@wsgr.com 1/1}: CIT—04312 Attorneys for Defendants Tintri, Inc, Ken NOT Notice Klein, Jan Halifax, John Bolger, Charles | 125 ' Giancarlo, Adam Grossler, Kieran Harly, r—A Harvey Jones, Christopher Schaepe, Peter 1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIll r—A Sonsini \ )——A-»—A SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO r—A |>—-* INRE TINTRI, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION - Lead Case No. l7-CIV—04312 )—‘ This Document Relates To: (Consolidated with No. l7-CIV‘-04321 I and No. l7-CIV-O4618) r—A ALL ACTIONS NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION r—i [140.220 L8 (Jazmin) UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE 770m, , DC“ UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY >—‘ WVQMbWNHOOOONQUI-AWNH , CODE AND OF AUTOMATIC ' E T A L. STAY N *2. H . N N N N N [\3 N [\3 -1- NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER BANKRUPTCY CODE AND AUTOMATIC STAY CASE NO.: '17—CIV-043 l 2 TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ANDVALL PARTIES? ‘ OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 9, 2018, Defendant Tintri, Inc. (the “Debtor”) ﬁled a voluntary petition under chapter ll of title 11 of the United. States Code (the-“Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The proceeding has been assigned Case No; 1 8-1 l625-KJ C. A copy of the voluntary petition is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl & Jones LLP is general bankruptcy counsel to the Debtor in the Debtor’s chapter 11 case. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is filing this Notice for information purposes only. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that as a result-of the pendency of the ,11 bankruptcy case and the application of ll U.S.C. §: 362, all further proceedings against the12 Debtor to collect prepetition obligations are automatically stayed. The stay in effect under 1113 U.S.C. § 362(a) prevents, amongst other things, the following actions: A14 l. The commencement or continuation, including the issuance or employment of15 process, of a judicial, administrative, or other action or proceeding against the Debtor that was or16 could have been commenced before the commencement of the bankruptcy case, or to recover a17 claim against the Debtor that arose before the-commencement of the bankruptcy case;18‘ 2. The enforcement, against the Debtor or any property of the estate, of a judgment19 obtained before the commencement of the bankruptcy case;20 3. Any act to obtain possession .of property of the estate or of property from the '21 estate or to exercise control over property of the estate; I22 4. Any act to create, perfect, or enforce any lien against property of the estate;23 5. Any act to create, perfect, or enforce against property of the Debtor any lien to the24 extent that such lien secures a claim that arose before the commencement of the bankruptcy case;25 6. Any. act to collect, assess, recover a claim against the Debtor that arose before the26 commencement of the bankruptcy case;27 7. The setoff of any debt owing to the Debtor that arose before the commencement28 of the bankruptcy case against any claim against the Debtor. -2- NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER BANKRUPTCY CODE AND AUTOMATIC STAY , CASE No.: 17-CIv-O4312 The automatic stay granted by 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) will remain in effect until the bankruptcy case is dismissed or closed, or until such earlier times as set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 362(0), ((1), (e) and (t). . PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that contempt proceedings may be initiatedOOOOQONU‘I—b-UJNI—A against any party who participates in any 'violation of the automatic stay, and pursuant to the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Court may award actual damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, and in appropriate circ*mstances, ayvards of punitive damages to compensate the Debtor for losses arising out of the Violation of the automatic stay: Dated: July 10, 2Ql8 - WILSON SON IGOODRICH & ROSATI Attorneys for Defendants Tzntrt Inc., Ken Klein, Ian Halifax John Bolger, Charles Giancarlo, Adam Grossler Kieran Harty, Harvey Jones, Christopher Schaepe, Peter Sonsini -3- NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER BANKRUPTCY CODE AND AUTOMATIC STAY CASE NO.: l7-CIV-04312 PROOF OF SERVICE ' I, Tammy Bell, declare: I am employed in Santa Clara County, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, I 650 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, California 94304-1050. On this date, I served: NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE AND OF AUTOMATIC STAY E By consigning the document(s) to an express mail service for guaranteed next day delivery to the following person(s): 10 James I. J aconette . RObbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP 11 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 12 Samuel H. Rudman 13 Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 . 14 Melville, NY 11747'15 Corey D. Holzer‘16 Holzer & Holzer‘LLC 1200 Ashwood Parkway, Suite 410 17 Atlanta, GA 30338 18 Francis A. Bottini, Jr. Albert Y. Chang 19 Yury A. Kolesnikov Bottini & Bottini, Inc.20 7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102 La Jolla, CA 9203721 I Thomas S. Brown _22 Foley & Lardner LLP .555 California Street, Suite 170023 San Francisco, CA 94104 '24~ Roger A. Lane Foley & Lardner LLP25 111 Huntington Avenue, Suite 2500 ' Boston, MA 02199-761026 James G. Kreissznan27 Stephen P. Blake Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP28 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304 -1- PROOF OF SERVICE L Jonathan Rosenberg David K. Lukmire O’Melveny & Myers LLP 7 Times Square Tower New York, NY 10036 Matthew W. Close O’Melveny & Myers LLP 400 SOuth Hope Street, 18th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 I am readily familiar with Wilson Sonsini GOOdrich & Rosati’s practice for collection and processing of documents for delivery according to instructions indicated above. In the ordinary course of business, documents would be handled accordingly. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 10 foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Palo Alto, California on July 10, 2018. ‘ 11 12 . 6W?” Tammy ell. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25' 26 27 28 -2- PROOF oF SERVICEEXHIBIT A _ - ' Case 18‘ ,325-KJC Doc 1 Filed 07/10/18 .ge 1 of 16Fill'in this information to identify your case:United States Bankruptcy Court for the:DISTRICT OF DELAWARECase number (ifirnown) Chapter 11 El Check if this an amended ﬁlingOfficial Form 201 ,Voluntary Petition for NOn- individuals Filing for Bankruptcy 4/16'if more space ls needed, attach a separate sheet to this form. 0n the top of any additional pages, write the debtor‘ s name and case number (if known).For more Information, a separate document, Instructions .‘or Bankruptcy Forms for Non- Indivlduals, is available. '1. Debtor's name Tintri, Inc.2. All other names debtor used in the last 8 years include any assumed names. trade names and dolng business as names ‘3. Debtor's federal . Employeridentlflcatlon 26-2906978 Number (ElN) ‘ '4. Debtor's address Principal place of business Mailing address, if different from principal place of ' ' business ‘ 303 Ravendale Drive - Mountain Viewl CA 94043 _ Number. Street,vCity, State 8. ZIP Code PO. Box. Number, Street. City, State & ZIP Code V Santa Clara ‘ Location of principal assets, if different from principal County place of business Number. Street. City. State & ZIP Code5. Debtor's website (URL) www.t|ntri.com5- WP" °f “9'3”“ I Corporation (including Limited Liability Company (LLC) and Limited Liability Partnership (LLP)) Ci Partnership (excluding LLP), I Cl Other. Specify: ‘Ofﬁcial Form 201 Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy page 1 _ Case 18' ,525-KJC 'Doc 1 Filed 07/10/18 ge 2 of 16Debbi Tintri, Inc. Case number(llknown) Name7. Describe debtor's business A. Check one: C] Health Care Business (as deﬁned in 11 U.S.C. § 101(27A)) El Single Asset Real Estate (as deﬁned in 11 .U.S.C. § 101 (518)) E] Railroad (as deﬁned in 11 U.S.C. § 101(44» D Stockbroker (as-deﬁned in 11 U.S.C. § 101(53A)) Cl Commodity Broker (as deﬁned Inf-11 U.S.C. § 101(6)) El Clearing Bank (as deﬁned in 11 U.S.C. § 781(3)) I None ofthe above 8. Check all that apply [3 Tax-exempt entity (as described in 26 U.S.C. §501) Cl Investment company. including hedge fund or pooled investment vehicle (as deﬁned in 15 U.S.C. §80a-IS) [:1 Investment adviser (as deﬁned In 15 U.S.C. §80b-2(a)(11)) C. NAlCS (North American Industry Classiﬁcation System) 4-digit code that best describes debtor. See http://www.uscouIts.gov/four-diqit-nationaI-assoclation-nales-codes. 51828. Under which chapter of the Check one: Bankruptcy Code is the debtor filing? D Chapter 7 ' Cl Chapter 9 - Chapter11. Check allthatapp/y. D Debtor's aggregate noncontingent liquidated debts (excluding debts owed to insiders or afﬁliates) are less than $2, 566. 050 (amount subject to adjustment on 4/01/19 and every 3 years after that). E] The debtor is a small business debtor as deﬁned in 11 U.S.C. § 101 (51D).':i'.‘ the debtor is a'small business debtor. attach the most recent balance sheet, statement of operations. cash-ﬂow statement, and federal income tax return or if all of these documents do not exist. follow the procedure in 11 U.S.C.§1116(1)(B). A plan is being ﬁled with this petition. Ell] Acceptances of the plan were solicited prepetltion from one or more classes of creditors, in accordance with 11 U.S.C. § 1126(b). I The debtoris required to ﬁle periodic reports (for example. 10K and 1OQ) with the Securities and Exchange Commission according to § 13 or 15(d) oi the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. File the attachment to Voluntary Petition for Non- Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy under Chapter 11 (Ofﬁcial Form 201A) with this form. C] The debtor Is a shell company as deﬁned in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 12b-2. ' U Chapter 129. Were prior bankruptcy cases filed by or against I No. the debtor within the last 8 [:1 Yes: years? If more than 2 cases. attach a separate list. District . When Case number District When Case nu'mber10. Are any bankruptcy cases INo pending or being filed by a business partner or an . D Yes. affiliate of the debtor? List all cases. if more than 1, > attach a separate list Debtor . - Relationship District When Case number, if knownOfﬁcial Form 201 Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy . page 2 Case ‘18- .25-KJC Docl Filed 07/10/18‘ ‘ge3of 16Debi" Case number (Irknown) Tlntrl, Inc. Name11. Why Is the case filed In Check all that apply: thls district? I Debtor has had Its domicile, principal place of business, or principal assets in this district for 180 days immediately preceding the date of this petition or for a‘ longer part of such 180 days than In any other district. Cl A bankruptcy case concerning debtor's afﬁliate. general partner, or partnership is pending in this district.12. ‘ Does the debtor own or have possession of any I No Answer below for each property that needs immediate attention. Attach additional sheets If needed. real property or personal El Yes. property that needs immediate attention? Why does the property need Immediate attention? (Check all that apply.) C] It poses or is alleged to pose a threat of imminent and Identiﬁable hazard to public health or safety. ' ' What is the hazard? C] It needs to be physically secured or protected from the weather. El It includes perishable goods or assets that could quickly deteriorate or lose value without attention (for-example, livestock, seasonal goods. meat. dairy. produce, or securities-related assets or other options). C] Other Where ‘Is the property? . Number, Street. City, State & ZIP Code Is the property insured? I C] No I] Yes. Insurance agency-13. Statistical and administrative Information Debtor's estimation of available funds , Check one: I Contact name Phone ' Funds will be available for distribution to unsecured creditors. El After any administrative expenses are paid, no funds will be available to unsecured creditors.14. Estimated number of creditors [:1 1-49 El 50-99 I 1,000-5,000 [:1 5001401000 I] 25001-50000 El 50,001—100.000 D 100-199 D 10,001.25‘000 El More than100.000 IZI 200-99915- EStlmated Assets El $0 - $50,000 D $50,001 - $100,000 El $100,001 - $500.000 l El $1,000,001 - $10 million El $10,000,001 - $50 million $50,000,001 - $100 million [3 $500,000,001 - $1 billion Cl $1,000,000.001 - $10 billion D $10,000.000,001 - $50 billion D $500.001 - $1 million El $100,000,001 — $500 million i] More than $50 billion16. Estimated liabilities El $0 - $50,000 Dl$1,000,001- $10 million III $500,000,001 - $1 billion [I $50,001 $100,000 — III $100,001 - $500,000 I $10,000,001 - $50 million El $50,000,001 - $100 million El $1,000.000,001 - $1.0 billion III $10.000,000,001 - $50 billion III $500,001 - $1 million [I $100,000,001 - $500 million Cl More than $50 billionOfficial Form 201 Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy page 3 Case 15. :625-KJC DOC 1 Filed 07/10/18 age 4 Of 16Debtor Tintri,inc.1 ' - Case number (ifknown) _ Name Request for Relief, Declaration, and SignaturesWARNING~ ~Bankruptcy fraud is a serious crime. Making a false statement'in connection with a bankruptcy case can result in ﬁnes up to $500 000 or ' Imprisonment for up to 20 years. or both 18 U S C §§1..52 1341 1519. and 357117. Declaration andsignature of authorized The debtor requests relief in accordance with the chapter of titlei 1. United States Code, speciﬁed in this petition.~ representative of debtor i have been authorized to file this petition on behalf of the debtor. i have examined the information in this petition and have a reasonable belief that the information is trued and correct. I declare under penalty of pa ‘ury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on agile! 2018 MM I DD [{YYYY X pk" ‘\ fl Kieran Harty l . Signa‘ture 6f authorized repzesént tive of debtor Printed name; Co-Founder and Chi Technology TING Officer18. Signature of attomey @mz: XSignature of attorney for debtor MW ‘ - mascara/ma MM I DO / YYYY Colin R. Robinson Printed name Pachulski Stang Ziehi 8. Jones LLP Firm name 919 N. Market Street 17th Floor Wilmington, DE 19899 - Number, Street. City. State -&.ZIP Code 302-652-4100' crobinson@pszjiaw.com Contact phone ~———-r—. Email address 5524 DE Bar number and State.Ofﬁcial Form 201 Voluntary Petition for Non-individuals Filing for Bankruptcy . page 4 ' Case 18—, 2540:: Doc 1 Filed 07/10/18 ,ie 5 of 16Ofﬁcial Form 201A (12/15)Section 13 or I 5 (d) of f[If debtor is required to [e periodic reports the Securities (e. g. Jorms 10K and IOQ) with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Exchange Act of 1934 and IS requesting relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, thisExhibit ”A " shall be completed and attached to the petition. ] United States Bankruptcy Court District of Delaware in re Tintri, Inc. Case No. ' ' _ Debtor(s) Chapter 11 Attachment to Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for - Bankruptcy under Chapter 111. If any of the debtor's securities are registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the SEC ﬁle number is None .2. The following ﬁnancial data is the latest available information and refers to the debtor's condition on 01/31/18 . , ' a. Total assets $ 76,250,000.00 b. Total debts (including debts listed in 2.0., below) ‘ $ 168.000.000.00 ' c. Debt securities held by more than 500 holders: ‘ Approximate number of holders:secured Cl unsecured ‘ Cl subordinated D $ 0.00 0 secured Cl unsecured El subordinated Ci ’ $ 0.00 0 secured D unsecured El subordinated C] $ 0.00 0 secured D unsecured Ci subordinated D $ 0.00 . 0 secured Ci unsecured El subordinate-:1 Cl $ 0.00 0 h d. Number of shares of preferred stock 0 0 c. Number of shares common stock . 33,920,522 0 Comments, if any:3. Brief description of Debtor's business: The Debtor provides large organizations and cloud service providers with an enterprise cloud platform that offers public cloud capabilities inside their own data centers and that can also connect to public cloud services.4. List the name of any person who directly or indirectly owns, controls, or holds, with power to vote, 5% or more of the voting securities of debtor: NewEnterprlse Associates Silver Lake Kraftwerk insight Venture Partners Lightspeed Venture Partners Viii, L. P. Christopher Schaepe Kieran HartyOfﬂcial Form 201A Attachment to Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy under Chapter 11Software Copyright (c) 1996-2018 lies! Case. LLC - www.besicase.eom . Best Case Bankruptcy Case 1t :625-KJC Doc 1 Filed 07/10/18 \ age 6 of 16 SECRETARY‘S CERTIFICATE- OF ‘ TINTRI, INC. ' Sect 9 , 2018 The undersigned hereby certiﬁes that:1. He is the duly elected and qualiﬁed Secretary of Tintri, Inc.2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true, "complete and correct copy of resolutions adopted by the beard of directors of Tintri, Inc. Such resolutions have not been amended, modiﬁed or rescinded since their adoption and remain in full force and effect as of the I ' date hereof. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Secretary’s certiﬁcate tobe effective as of the date ﬁrst set forth above. Name :5 Title: SecretaryDOCS_SF 197041 .3 83990/001 Case 18- _ '254KJC Doc 1 Filed 07/10/18 _,~,]e 7 0f 16 TINTRI, INC. Resolutions of the Board of Directors July'6, 2018 Filing of Bankruptcy Petition and Related Matters WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Tintri, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), acting pursuant to the laws of the State of Delaware, has Considered the ﬁnancial and operational aspects cf the Company’s business; WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed the historical performance of the Company, the market for the Company’s products, the Company’s existing and available cash resources, and the current and long-term liabilities of the Company; WHEREAS, the Board has, over the last several months, reviewed the materials presented to it by the management of and the advisers to the Company regarding the possible need to undertake a ﬁnancial and operational restructuring of the Company (the “Restructuring”); and WHEREAS, the Board has analyzed each of the ﬁnancial and strategic alternatives, available to it, including those available on a consensual basis with the principal stakeholders of (the Company, which were not forthcoming, and the impact of the foregoing on the Company’s business and its creditors, employees, stockholders, and other interested parties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in the judgment of the Board, it is desirable and in the best interests of the Company, its creditors, employees, stockholders and other interested parties that a petition be ﬁled by the Company seeking relief under the provisions of chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware; RESOLVED, that consistent with the Restructuring, Robert J. Duffy of Berkeley Research Group, LLC (“BRG”) is hereby appointed to the ofﬁce of Chief Restructuring Ofﬁcer (“CRO”) of the Company and BRG shall assist Mr. Duffy in carryingout his ’ ‘ ‘ ' duties as CRO; RESOLVED, that the ofﬁcers of the Company, including the Chief Restructuring Ofﬁcer (each, an “Authorized Ofﬁcer”) be, and each of them hereby is, authorized on behalf of the Company to execute, verify and ﬁle all petitions, schedules, lists, and other papers or documents, and to take and perform any and all further actions and steps that any such Authorized Ofﬁcer deems necessary, desirable and proper in connection with the Company’s chapter 1 1 case, with a view to the successful prosecution of such case; RESOLVED,'that the Company, subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court, as debtor _ and debtor in possession under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, shall be, and it hereby is, authorized to: (a) enter into a new, debtor in possession ﬁnancing facility (the “DIP Docs_sr:97211.2 83990/001 , Case 18- 25-KJC Docl Filed 07/10/18 le80f 16 Facility”) having a maximum borrowing amount of $5.0 million and any associated documents and consummate, and perform under, the transactions contemplated therein (collectively, the “Financing Transactions”) with such lenders and on such terms substantially consistent with those presented to the Boa1d on or prior to the date hereof and as may be further approved, modiﬁed or amended by any one or more of the Authorized Ofﬁcers, as may be reasonably necessary or desirable for the continuing conduct of the affairs of the Company; and (b) pay related fees and grant secur1ty interests in and liens upon some, all or substantially all of the Company’s assets, in such case, as may be deemed necessary or desirable by- any One or mo1e of the Authorized Ofﬁcers in connection with the Financing Transactions; RESOLVED, that the Authorized Ofﬁcers, on behalf of the Company, are authorized, empowered and directed to retain the law ﬁrm of Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP (“PSZ&J”) as bankruptcy counsel to represent and assist the Company in carrying out its duties under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, and to take any and all actions to advance the Company’s rights in connection therewith, and the Authorized Ofﬁcers are hereby authorized and directed to execute appropriate retention agreements, pay appropriate retainers prior to and immediately upon the ﬁling of the bankruptcy, and to ’ cause to be ﬁled an appropriate application for authority to retain the services of PSZ&J; RESOLVED, that the Authorized Ofﬁcers, on behalf of the Company, are authorized, empowered and directed to retain the services of Wilson Sonsini‘Goodrich & Rosati (“WSGR”) as the Company’s special corporate counsel, effective as of the date the petition is ﬁled, and in connection therewith, the Authorized Ofﬁcers are hereby authorizedand directed to execute appropriate retention agreements, pay appropriate retainers prior to and immediately upon the ﬁling of the bankruptcy, and to cause to be ﬁled an appropriate application for authority to retain the services of WSGR; RESOLVED, that the Authorized Ofﬁcers, on behalf of the Company, are authorized, empowered and directed to retain the services of a claims, noticing, solicitatidn agent and administrative adviser, effective as of the date the petition is ﬁled, and in connection therewith, the Authorized Ofﬁcers are hereby authorized and directed to exec

Related Contentin San Mateo County

Case

24-CIV-05233

Aug 22, 2024 |24-CIV-05233

Case

16325349

Aug 19, 2024 |16325349

Case

24-CIV-05232

Aug 22, 2024 |24-CIV-05232

Case

24-CIV-05203

Aug 21, 2024 |24-CIV-05203

Case

24-CIV-05159

Aug 20, 2024 |24-CIV-05159

Case

24-CIV-05181

Case

16384994

Aug 23, 2024 |16384994

Case

16354888

Aug 21, 2024 |16354888

Ruling

Schwartz Foundation, a California corporation, et al vs Donald Schwartz, et al

Aug 07, 2024 |21CV00416

21CV00416SCHWARTZ FOUNDATION v. SCHWARTZ PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO DEEM REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS AS ADMITTED PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AND/OR ISSUE AND EVIDENTIARY SANCTIONS These unopposed motions are granted. This discovery dispute concerns written discovery propounded on defendants in 2021 and2022. Page 3 of 6 I. DISCOVERY BACKGROUND Plaintiffs served a first set of written discovery on April 6, 2021, which consisted of formand special interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and requests for admissions,on defendants. Due to inadequate responses, plaintiffs filed a motion to compel furtherresponses, which this court granted on January 10, 2022, and ordered the payment of sanctions.(Ex. 1 to Dec. of Schum.) Defendants did not comply with the January 10, 2022 order to servefurther, verified responses and never paid the sanctions ordered. (Dec. of Schum at ¶ 6.) On December 22, 2022, defendant Donald Schwartz served supplemental responses tosome of the discovery at issue, to which plaintiffs followed up with continued meet and conferefforts as they found the responses to lack compliance with the court’s prior order. (Dec. ofSchum at ¶¶ 12-13.) The other defendants, Charles P. Schwartz, III, David R. Schwartz, MichaelOsterberg, Paul D. Schwartz, and Stevon Schwartz failed to serve any supplemental responses asrequired by the January 10, 2022 court order. (Dec. of Schum at ¶ 12.) On March 21, 2023, plaintiffs filed a second motion to compel and requested sanctions.After the February 27, 2024, hearing on this motion, the court ordered defendants to serve code-compliant responses by March 29, 2024. The order stated, in part, that should defendants fail tocomply with the court’s order “the court may issue evidentiary sanctions in the form ofprohibiting the introduction of evidence not earlier produced in discovery, deeming mattersadmitted, and/or other appropriate terminating sanction(s).” (See Order dated March 11, 2024.)Plaintiffs assert they have not received the required discovery responses, documents production,or sanctions, as per the court’s March 11, 2024 order. (Dec. of Schum at ¶ 21.) Plaintiffs propounded a second set of written discovery on defendants Donald Schwartzand Michael Osterberg on January 4, 2022, which consisted of special interrogatories andrequests for production of documents. (Dec of Schum, Exs. 13-18.) Defendants Schwartz andOsterberg have never responded to these requests. (Dec. of Schum at ¶ 23.) After meet andconfer efforts, plaintiffs filed a motion to compel on March 22, 2023. The court granted thismotion to compel and ordered sanctions to be paid. (See Order dated March 11, 2024.) Plaintiffsassert defendants have ignored this order, have not served responses as required, and have notpaid the ordered sanctions. II. MOTIONS There are two motions before the court. Requests for admission deemed admitted Page 4 of 6 Plaintiffs request the truth of all matters specified in plaintiffs’ request for admissions, setone be deemed admitted, a confirmation that objections have been waived, and award sanctions.Plaintiffs contend as to Donald Schwartz, the January 10, 2022 and March 11, 2024 ordersrequired him to provide code-compliant responses to requests for admissions Nos. 25, 26, 27, 42,49, and 50 and as to the other defendants, the January 10 and March 11 orders required them toprovide verified responses to all requests. As noted above, plaintiffs served written discovery, including the requests for admissionsat issue in this motion on all defendants, on April 6, 2021. (Dec. of Takano at ¶ 3.) DonaldSchwartz served responses on May 17, 2021. (Dec. of Takano at ¶ 4.) On May 17, 2021 the otherdefendants served unverified responses. (Dec. of Takano at ¶ 5.) A motion to compel followedand the court granted plaintiffs’ motion and request for sanctions on January 10, 2022. (Dec. ofTakano, Ex. A.) Defendants did not comply with this order and plaintiffs filed a second motionto compel on March 21, 2023 which was not heard until February 27, 2024. (Dec. of Takano at¶¶ 11-12.) The court granted this second motion to compel and gave defendants until March 29,2024 to comply. Defendants have not complied with either order. (Dec. of Takano at ¶¶ 14-16.)Plaintiffs assert the March 11, 2024 order specifically warned defendants that their failure tocomply may result in the court deeming the matters admitted. Defendants did not oppose this motion. Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.290, subdivision (e) states that “[i]f a party thenfails to obey an order compelling further response to requests for admission, the court may orderthat the matters involved in the requests be deemed admitted. In lieu of, or in addition to, thisorder, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section2023.010).” Plaintiffs demonstrated they served requests for admissions on defendants. Only DonaldSchwartz responded but certain of his responses were found to be deficient by the court and hewas ordered to serve compliant responses, which he failed to do on two separate occasions. Theother defendants failed to respond to the requests, even after court order, requiring verification. (1) As to the requests for admissions, set one, directed to Donald Schwartz, the truth of the matters specified in plaintiffs’ request for admissions, set one, nos. 25, 26, 27, 42, 49 and 50 are deemed admitted and objections waived. (2) As to the request for admissions, set one propounded to Paul D. Schwartz, Charles P Schwartz, David R. Schwartz, Stevon S. Schwartz, and Michael Osterberg, all are deemed admitted and objections are waived. Motion for issue and/or terminating sanctions Page 5 of 6 Plaintiffs also seek and order: (1) striking defendants’ answers to the complaint and firstamended complaint and (2) striking Donald Schwartz’s and Micheal Osterberg’s cross-complaintfiled September 23, 2021. In the alternative, plaintiffs request issue or evidentiary sanctions. Themotion to strike is granted. Plaintiffs assert terminating sanctions are warranted pursuant to Code of Civil Proceduresection 2023.010 which outlines the misuse of the discovery process and section 2023.030,subdivision (d) which allows for terminating sanctions. Plaintiffs contend that the incrementalapproach to discovery sanctions has been followed, as defendants failed to comply with twoprior court orders. Defendants have not opposed this motion. The court has the discretion to grant, or not grant, the requested sanctions. (Sauer v. Sup.Ct. (Oak Indus. Inc.(1987) 195 Cal.App.3d, 213, 228.) The court may strike a party’s pleading,stay proceedings, dismiss a party’s action, or enter default against that party pursuant to Code ofCivil Procedure section 2023.202, subdivision (d). (Weil & Brown Civil Procedure Before Trial(TRG 2023) § 8:2185.) Reviewing the voluminous pleadings relating to this discovery dispute, the court’s priororders, and the history of defendants failing to comply with these orders over a lengthy period oftime, the court finds terminating sanctions as requested by plaintiffs are appropriate. Onlyissuing monetary sanctions has not compelled defendants to comply with the court’s orders andthe Discovery Act. Defendants’ answers to the complaint and first amended complaint are stricken. Thecross-complaint filed by Donald Schwartz and Michael Osterberg is stricken. In addition, thecourt awards monetary sanctions in the amount of $4,000.00, jointly and severally againstdefendants and their counsel, payable within 20 days from the date the court’s order on thesemotions are entered.Notice to prevailing parties: Local Rule 2.10.01 requires you to submit a proposed formal orderincorporating, verbatim, the language of any tentative ruling – or attaching and incorporating thetentative by reference - or an order consistent with the announced ruling of the Court, inaccordance with California Rule of Court 3.1312. Such proposed order is required even if theprevailing party submitted a proposed order prior to the hearing (unless the tentative issimply to “grant”). Failure to comply with Local Rule 2.10.01 may result in the imposition ofsanctions following an order to show cause hearing, if a proposed order is not timely filed. Page 6 of 6

Ruling

GOVIND VAGHASHIA VS PRASHANT VAGHASHIA ET AL

Aug 13, 2024 |BC696133

Case Number: BC696133 Hearing Date: August 13, 2024 Dept: 17 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles DEPARTMENT 17 TENTATIVE RULING GOVIND VAGHASHIA vs. PRASHANT VAGHASHIA, et al. Case No.: BC696133 Related Case Nos.: BC696798 and BS172969 Hearing Date: August 13, 2024 The Govind Parties motion for a stay is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED as to the stay of enforcement on the Courts December 1, 2023 and February 22, 2024 Orders. The motion is DENIED as to the release of the Levied Funds. The Court orders these funds held pursuant to CCP section 697.050, until the Prashant Parties motion to determine insufficiency of the first bond can be held. On 7/3/2018, Plaintiffs Govind Vaghashia (Govind) as an individual and on behalf of Graphic Research, Inc. dba Gtek/Bycan Systems filed a second amended complaint (SAC) against Prashant Vaghashia (Prashant), Graphic Research, Inc. dba Gtek/Bycan Systems (GRI), alleging: (1) involuntary dissolution; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) accounting; and (4) violation of Corporations Code sections 1601 and 1602. On 7/23/2024, the Govind Parties filed a motion to stay proceedings and recall, quash, and vacate writs of execution and notices of levy and release all execution liens. Discussion The Govind Parties argue that a stay is mandatory given that they have now posted bonds in excess of $20.5 million on 7/22/2024, and that these bonds are in excess of 150% of the amount purportedly owed by Govind Parties under the contested settlement agreement. Moreover, the Govind Parties argue that a discretionary stay is warranted because: (1) the Govind Parties previously and newly posted bonds total almost $33 million when no more than $20.5 million is due under the disputed settlement; and (2) the Court of Appeal has not resolved the central question underlying all allegedly due payments whether there is a valid and enforceable settlement or whether the purported settlement should be set aside or vacated. In response, the Prashant Parties filed only a limited opposition. They concede that [b]ecause the Govind Parties have finally provided bonds in an amount that meets the statutory threshold, Prashant and Mita agree that any current Writs of Execution issued pursuant to those orders (and there is only one on the February 22, 2024 Order), the Notices of Levy, and the any liens created, are extinguished, recalled and are of no further force and effect. (2: 10-13.) However, the Prashant Parties do not agree that the funds previously levied and delivered to the Los Angeles County Sheriff (Levying Officer) should be released to the Govind Parties, arguing: Prashant and Mita do not agree that the funds previously levied and delivered to the Los Angeles County Sheriff (Levying Officer) should be released to the Govind Parties. The Levying Officer currently holds $1,489,230.84 (Levied Funds.). Pursuant to Section 697.050 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, this Court may, and in this case, should, order those funds as a result of a dispute between the parties on the amount of a prior bond issued. The $12,390,000.20 bond was filed on July 17, 2023 (First Bond) and stayed enforcement of two orders of this Court dated April 20, 2023, and May 8, 2023. Because the orders were issued a year ago, interest has accumulated to render the First Bond insufficient. Prashant and Mita will file a Motion to Determine Insufficiency of the First Bond. Consistent with Section 697.050, that (First Bond Motion), the Levied Funds be held until the dispute between the parties on the First Bond is determined. Counsel have diligently met and conferred on this proposal, but have not yet reached agreement on the disposition of the Levied Funds, leaving it as the sole open issue on this Motion. (Opp., 2: 14-26.) Under section 697.050 [i]f a lien created pursuant to this division is extinguished, property held subject to the lien shall be released unless the property is to be held under another lien or the property is ordered by the court to be held pending resolution of a dispute concerning its proper disposition. (CCP § 697.050.) Because Prashant and Mita have now objected to the sufficiency of the First Bond and indicated their intent to file a Motion to Determine Sufficient of First Bond, a dispute concerning the proper disposition of the Levied Funds has arisen. As such, the Court finds the levied funds should be held until this dispute can be resolved. On a final note, the Court acknowledges the Prashant Parties calculations regarding the insufficiency of the First Bond, and the fact that (assuming these calculations are correct) the levied funds are just over the amount need to replenish the First Bond. Holding the funds for the time being gives the Govind Parties time and flexibility to determine how best to structure their obligations on the First Bond. However, the Court agrees that the preferred outcome would be through a Stipulation and Order jointly submitted by the parties, and urges the parties to work cooperatively towards an outcome which does not require Court intervention. Based on the foregoing, the Govind Parties motion for a stay is granted in part, denied in part. The Govind Parties motion is stayed as to the enforcement of the Courts December 1, 2023 and February 22, 2024 Orders. The motion is denied as to the release of the Levied Funds. The Court orders these funds held pursuant to CCP section 697.050, until the Prashant Parties motion to determine insufficiency of the first bond can be held. It is so ordered. Dated: August , 2024 Hon. Jon R. Takasugi Judge of the Superior Court Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If a party submits on the tentative, the partys email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.

Ruling

Schwartz Foundation, a California corporation, et al vs Donald Schwartz, et al

Aug 08, 2024 |21CV00416

Ruling

GOVIND VAGHASHIA VS PRASHANT VAGHASHIA ET AL

Aug 01, 2024 |BC696133

Case Number: BC696133 Hearing Date: August 1, 2024 Dept: 17 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles DEPARTMENT 17 TENTATIVE RULING GOVIND VAGHASHIA vs. PRASHANT VAGHASHIA, et al. Case No.: BC696133 Related Case Nos.: BC696798 and BS172969 Hearing Date: August 1, 2024 The Govind Parties motion to quash is CONTINUED. On 7/3/2018, Plaintiffs Govind Vaghashia (Govind) as an individual and on behalf of Graphic Research, Inc. dba Gtek/Bycan Systems filed a second amended complaint (SAC) against Prashant Vaghashia (Prashant), Graphic Research, Inc. dba Gtek/Bycan Systems (GRI), alleging: (1) involuntary dissolution; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) accounting; and (4) violation of Corporations Code sections 1601 and 1602. On 5/28/2024, the Govind Parties filed a motion to quash deposition subpoena on non-party Wells Fargo Bank for production of business records. On 7/19/2024, the Los Angeles Court Systems network was the victim of a cyberattack which disrupted eCourts filing and document system. At this time, eCourt is unable to retrieve the motion filed by the Govind Parties, and a hardcopy courtesy copy was not filed with the Court. Moreover, given the disruption to the filing system, it is unclear whether an opposition or reply were ever filed. The motion is continued to allow the motion to be refiled. Opposition and reply due according to Code. Based on the foregoing, the Govind Parties motion to quash is continued. It is so ordered. Dated: August , 2024 Hon. Jon R. Takasugi Judge of the Superior Court Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If a party submits on the tentative, the partys email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.

Ruling

Schwartz Foundation, a California corporation, et al vs Donald Schwartz, et al

Aug 05, 2024 |21CV00416

Ruling

FRIEND OF CAMDEN, INC. VS BARBARA BRANDT, ET AL.

Aug 06, 2024 |19STCP04706

Case Number: 19STCP04706 Hearing Date: August 6, 2024 Dept: B Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles Southwest District Torrance Dept. B FRIEND OF CAMDEN INC., Plaintiff, Case No.: 19STCP04706 vs. [Tentative] RULING BARBARA BRANDT, et al., Defendants. Hearing Date: August 6, 2024 Moving Parties: Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Friend of Camden, Inc. and Plaintiffs Avondale Investment Partners, L.P. and Ralph and Shirley Shapiro, as Trustees of The Shapiro Irrevocable Trust Dated May 25, 1993. Responding Party: None Verified Application of Stephen P. Farrelly for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice The court considered the moving papers. No opposition has been received. RULING The verified application of Stephen P. Farrelly for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. BACKGROUND This dispute arises out of the soon-to-be end of the Limited Liability Company Ventura-Petit East LLC, an entity that once owned an office building. It was sold in June 2023 for $40 million. The net proceeds are approximately $31 million. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Friend of Camden, Inc. and Plaintiffs Avondale Investment Partners, L.P. and Ralph and Shirley Shapiro, as Trustees of The Shapiro Irrevocable Trust Dated May 25, 199 (collectively, Plaintiffs) apply to the court for an order to admit Attorney Stephen P. Farrelly pro hac vice as counsel for Plaintiffs. LEGAL AUTHORITY California Rules of Court Rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear as counsel pro hac vice in the State of California by filing a verified application together with proof of service by mail of a copy of the application and notice of hearing on all parties who have appeared in the case and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office, with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of the State of California, and is not regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California. The application must state: (1) the applicants residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission; (3) that the applicant is a member in good standing in those courts; (4) that the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (5) the title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and (5) the name, address, and telephone number of the active member of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record in the local action. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d).) DISCUSSION The court finds that Counsel Farrellys application complies with the requirements set forth under California Rules of Court Rule 9.40. (See generally Verified Application.) Counsel Farrelly states that his residence is in Brooklyn, New York and that he is an attorney with Ellis George LLP, with an office located at 152 W. 57th Street, 28th Floor, New York, New York 10019. (Farrelly Decl. at ¶ 4; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)(1).) He further states that he is a member in good standing with the State Bar of New York since 2014. (Id. at ¶ 5-6; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)(2)-(4).) Also, in the preceding two years he has submitted three applications to appear as counsel pro hac vice, which each had been approved. (Id. at ¶ 8-10; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)(5).) Counsel Farrellly further states John Harabedian is an active members of the State Bar of California and associated with Ellis George LLP, which is located at 2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 3000, Los Angeles, California 90067. (Id. at ¶ 10; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)(6).) Furthermore, the applicant has paid the required $50.00 fee to the State Bar of California and provided notice to the State Bar of this application. (Harabedian Decl. ¶ 4, Exh. B; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(e).) Accordingly, the application to admit Counsel Farrelly pro hac vice is GRANTED. ORDER The verified application of Stephen P. Farrelly for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. Moving party is ordered to give notice of ruling.

Ruling

Schwartz Foundation, a California corporation, et al vs Donald Schwartz, et al

Aug 06, 2024 |21CV00416

Ruling

Schwartz Foundation, a California corporation, et al vs Donald Schwartz, et al

Aug 04, 2024 |21CV00416

Ruling

RELIANT LIFE SHARES LLC VS DANIEL B COOPER

Aug 01, 2024 |BC604858

Case Number: BC604858 Hearing Date: August 1, 2024 Dept: T BC604858 RELIANT V COOPER The court is engaged in a jury trial and does not have the time available to hear all of these matters on the morning of 8/1/2024. Alternatively, the court could hear the matters at 10 a.m. on 8/2/2024 or at 10 a.m. or 2:00 p.m. on 8/9/2024. Hearing on Motion - Other Petition to Confirm Resignation of Bank of Utah as Successor Trustee to the Reliant Trust 08/01/2024 08:30 AM Dept T / Van Nuys East Hearing on Ex Parte Application BY RECEIVER CHRISTOPHER CONWAY TO POOL TRUST ASSETS AND AGGREGATE INVESTOR INTERESTS IN A NEW RECEIVERSHIP TRUST 08/01/2024 08:30 AM Dept T / Van Nuys East Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Shorten Time for hearing (trailed from 7/22/2024) 08/01/2024 08:30 AM Dept T / Van Nuys East

Document

Norman S. Wright Mechanical Equipment Corp. vs. SmartLabs Corporate, LLC, et al

Apr 19, 2024 |Finigan, Jeffrey R. |(06) Unlimited Breach of Contract/Warranty |24-CIV-02412

Document

Leslie Talley vs. Appian Engineering Inc, et al

Oct 07, 2021 |Healy, Nicole S. |(23) Unlimited Other PI/PD/WD |21-CIV-05441

Document

Alyssa Csabanyi vs. Victoria Stephens, et al

Apr 26, 2024 |Greenberg, Susan |(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination |24-CIV-02561

Document

James Harry Lightfoot, et al vs. Ed A. Stein, et al

Feb 28, 2023 |Swope, V. Raymond |(26) Unlimited Other Real Property |23-CIV-00921

Document

CORRINA BLANEY, et al vs. RICHARD CHIU, JR, et al

Aug 02, 2023 |Finigan, Jeffrey R. |(23) Unlimited Other PI/PD/WD |23-CIV-03583

Document

Seton Pacific Construction vs. Suffolk Construction Company Inc., et al

Apr 09, 2020 |Fineman, Nancy |(06) Unlimited Breach of Contract/Warranty |20-CIV-01699

Document

Casedria Parker vs THE SALVATION ARMY

Nov 02, 2020 |Fineman, Nancy L. |Complex Civil Unlimited Class Action |20-CIV-04787

Document

ANDREW G WATTERS vs. SIDDHARTH BREJA, et al

Feb 06, 2024 |Greenberg, Susan |(16) Unlimited Fraud |24-CIV-00660

Notice OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE AND OF AUTOMATIC - Notice July 10, 2018 (2024)

FAQs

What does filing Chapter 11 mean for a company? ›

Background. A case filed under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code is frequently referred to as a "reorganization" bankruptcy. Usually, the debtor remains “in possession,” has the powers and duties of a trustee, may continue to operate its business, and may, with court approval, borrow new money.

What is a Chapter 11 petition? ›

A Chapter 11 bankruptcy allows a company to stay in business and restructure its finances and operations. If a company filing for Chapter 11 opts to propose a reorganization plan, it must be in the best interest of the creditors. If the debtor does not put forth a plan, the creditors may propose one instead.

Tell Me More ›

What is a person who has filed a petition for relief under the Bankruptcy Code? ›

debtor. A person who has filed a petition for relief under the Bankruptcy Code. debtor education. see credit counseling.

Discover More Details ›

What is the filing of an involuntary petition under the Federal Bankruptcy Code? ›

The procedure is that the creditors who submit the involuntary petition must prepare and submit a summons to the court on the the same date that the involuntary petition is filed. If the parties do not submit a summons to the court, the involuntary petition may be dismissed without a hearing.

Does Chapter 11 wipe out all debt? ›

The discharge received by an individual debtor in a Chapter 11 case discharges the debtor from all pre-confirmation debts except those that would not be dischargeable in a Chapter 7 case filed by the same debtor.

Show Me More ›

Can a company come back from Chapter 11? ›

Filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy allows a company to restructure its debts. In some cases, companies are able to emerge from bankruptcy stronger than ever. General Motors, Texaco, and Marvel Entertainment are three of many companies that have emerged from bankruptcy successfully.

What happens after filing Chapter 11? ›

The Reorganization Process. Throughout a Chapter 11 reorganization, a debtor continues to operate in the ordinary course of business. Any activities outside of the ordinary course of business, such as selling the entire company or raising postpetition financing, require Bankruptcy Court approval.

Read The Full Story ›

What circ*mstances would a person want to file Chapter 11? ›

So, why could an individual choose a Chapter 11? It's a viable option if A) they don't want to liquidate all their assets in Chapter 7, or B) have too much debt to qualify for a reorganization plan under Chapter 13. Your secured debts (mortgage, car payment, etc.)

See Details ›

Who gets paid first in Chapter 11? ›

Secured creditors like banks are going to get paid first. This is because their credit is secured by assets—typically ones that your business controls.

Discover More ›

What is chapter 11 of title 11 of the US code? ›

Chapter XI [ chapter 11 of former title 11] allows a debtor to negotiate a plan outside of court and, having reached a settlement with a majority in number and amount of each class of creditors, permits the debtor to bind all unsecured creditors to the terms of the arrangement.

Discover More Details ›

Does the trustee monitor your bank account? ›

Since a trustee's focus is to review your assets and administer the plan to repay your creditors, yes, he or she will need access to your bank accounts and other financial information.

What condition must exist for filing an involuntary bankruptcy petition? ›

A petitioning creditor is qualified to file an involuntary petition if they hold a claim against the debtor that is not contingent as to liability or the subject of a bona fide dispute regarding the liability or its amount, according to the Bankruptcy Code.

Find Out More ›

Will the filing of a petition for bankruptcy automatically stay most legal? ›

It is provided for in section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code. Triggered immediately on filing of the bankruptcy petition, it automatically stops substantially all acts and proceedings against the debtor and its property.

Discover More ›

What are the differences between a voluntary and an involuntary petition for bankruptcy? ›

Voluntary bankruptcy is a bankruptcy proceeding commenced by the debtor; bankruptcy instituted by an adjudication upon a debtor's petition. Involuntary bankruptcy, on the other hand, is a bankruptcy case initiated by a debtor's creditors.

Get More Info ›

What happens if a voluntary petition in bankruptcy is found to be proper? ›

Question: If a voluntary petition in bankruptcy is found to be proper, the courtputs into place an automatic stay.

What happens to my money when a company files Chapter 11? ›

After filing for Chapter 11, the company's stock will be delisted from the major exchanges. Common stock shareholders are last in line to recover their investments, behind bondholders and preferred shareholders. As a result, shareholders may receive pennies on the dollar, if anything at all.

Find Out More ›

What happens to employees when a company files for Chapter 11? ›

Chapter 11

Many employees may remain at work and continue to be paid and receive benefits. However, some may be laid off. If the laid-off employees are owed wages and benefits they become creditors of the company.

Read On ›

Who owns a company after Chapter 11? ›

Note: Investors should be cautious when buying common stock of companies in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. It is extremely risky and is likely to lead to financial loss. Although a company may emerge from bankruptcy as a viable entity, generally, the creditors and the bondholders become the new owners of the shares.

View Details ›

Do I lose my stock if a company files Chapter 11? ›

Practically speaking, companies usually take a significant hit to their stock value after a bankruptcy filing. Investors should understand that existing shares of common stock in a company filing for Chapter 11 usually are canceled, even if the company emerges and returns to profitability.

Explore More ›

Notice OF FILING OF PETITION UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE AND OF AUTOMATIC - Notice July 10, 2018 (2024)

Preview

Related Contentin San Mateo County

Case

Case

Case

Case

Case

Case

Case

Case

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Ruling

Document

Document

Document

Document

Document

Document

Document

Document

FAQs

What does filing Chapter 11 mean for a company? ›

Does the trustee monitor your bank account? ›