Bluebond Tentative Ruling

United States Bankruptcy Court
Central District of California

Los Angeles
Chief Judge Sheri Bluebond, Presiding
Courtroom 1539 Calendar
Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539
10:00 AM
2:17-21160 Diego Antonio Guzman Chapter 7
#1.00 Notice of motion and motion for relief from the automatic stay with supporting
declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: U 2013 CHRYSLER 200 * VIN#
1C3CCBBB6DN559273
MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, NA
Docket 14
Courtroom Deputy:
11/15/17 - Megan Lees, (619)501-3503, has been approved for telephonic
appearance on 11/28/17 @ 10am.
Tentative Ruling:
Grant without waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3).
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Diego Antonio Guzman Represented By
Richard F Hernandez
Movant(s):
Bank of America, N.A. Represented By
Megan E Lees
Trustee(s):
John J Menchaca (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 1 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-21939 Philip Sol Migdol and Christina Maria Romero Chapter 7
declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2016 Hyundai Sonata VIN#
5NPE24AF1GH263136
MOVANT: HYUNDAI MOTOR FINANCE
Docket 9
Courtroom Deputy:
11/20/17 - Austin Nagel, (925)855-8080, x 205, has been approved for
telephonic appearance on 11/28/17 @ 10am
Tentative Ruling:
Grant with waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3).
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Philip Sol Migdol Represented By
Donald E Iwuchuku
Joint Debtor(s):
Christina Maria Romero Represented By
Donald E Iwuchuku
Movant(s):
Hyundai Motor Finance Represented By
Austin P Nagel
Trustee(s):
Wesley H Avery (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 2 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-21990 Grant Ovsepyan Chapter 7
declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2015 MERCEDES-BENZ E350, VIN
WDDHF5KB7FB131278
MOVANT: DAIMLER TRUST
Docket 10
Courtroom Deputy:
11/21/17 - John Kim, (714)431-1086, has been approved for telephonic
appearance on 11/28/17 @ 10am
Tentative Ruling:
Grant with waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3) (without prejudice to debtor's rights under
section 365(p)).
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Grant Ovsepyan Represented By
Aris Artounians
Movant(s):
Daimler Trust Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Richard K Diamond (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 3 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-22415 Adjar, Inc. Chapter 7
declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 2375 Sepulveda Blvd., Torrance, CA
90501
MOVANT: FRANK B. STARTUP
Docket 4
Courtroom Deputy:
11/8/17 - Arnold Wuhrman, (951)304-3720, has been approved for telephonic
appearance on 11/28/17 @ 10am.
Tentative Ruling:
Grant without waiver of Rule 4001(a)(3).
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Adjar, Inc. Represented By
David S Hagen
Movant(s):
Susie M. Startup Represented By
Arnold H Wuhrman
Frank B. Startup Represented By
Arnold H Wuhrman
Trustee(s):
Brad D Krasnoff (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 4 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-22749 Lisa Cannizzaro Chapter 7
declarations UNLAWFUL DETAINER RE: 6282 Vine Way (duplex) Los Angeles,
CA 90068
MOVANT: LAURA S. LARSON
Docket 16
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Lisa Cannizzaro Represented By
Leslie Richards
Movant(s):
Laura S. Larson Represented By
Carol G Unruh
Trustee(s):
Edward M Wolkowitz (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 5 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-23151 Isidro Juarez Solorzano Chapter 7
declarations PERSONAL PROPERTY RE: 2017 MITSUBISHI OUTLANDER,
VIN JA4AD2A39HZ055559
MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE, LLC.
Docket 9
Courtroom Deputy:
11/21/17 - John Kim, (714)431-1086, has been approved for telephonic
appearance on 11/28/17 @ 10am
Tentative Ruling:
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Isidro Juarez Solorzano Represented By
Daniel King
Movant(s):
TD Auto Finance LLC Represented By
Jennifer H Wang
Trustee(s):
Timothy Yoo (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 6 of 29

Los Angeles
10:00 AM
2:17-23539 Michael Roy Ponce and Denah Elaine Ponce Chapter 7
#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
located at 2193 Saticoy Street, Pomona, CA 91767
MOVANT: DENAH ELAINE PONCE
Docket 12
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Grant.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Michael Roy Ponce Represented By
William J Smyth
Joint Debtor(s):
Denah Elaine Ponce Represented By
William J Smyth
Movant(s):
Michael Roy Ponce Represented By
William J Smyth
Denah Elaine Ponce Represented By
William J Smyth
Trustee(s):
Sam S Leslie (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 7 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:16-15297 Eugene B Chun Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:16-01325 Cha v. Chun
#200.00 Status Conference re: 62 (Dischargeability - 523(a) (2) false pretenses, false
representation, actual fraud)) (68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and
malicious injury)),(41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e)))
Complaint by Byeong In Cha against Eugene B Chu
FR. 9-27-16, 11-1-16, 3-28-17, 7-25-17
Docket 1
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
9/23/16 -- Court approved stipulation continuing status conference to
November 1, 2016 at 2:00 pm. OFF CALENDAR FOR SEPTEMBER 27,
2016.
Tentative Ruling for November 1, 2016:
Impose sanctions of $150 each on counsel for the parties for failing to file
joint status report in a timely manner. Set discovery cutoff for late March,
2017. Why don't the parties want this matter sent to mediation? Hearing
required.
11/3/16 -- Court signed scheduling order setting following dates:
Cont'd status conference -- March 28, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.

Discovery cutoff -- March 31, 2017
L/D to file joint status report -- March 14, 2017
---------------------------------
Tentative Ruling for March 28, 2017:
The Court set a discovery cutoff of March 31, 2017. Apparently, the parties
will not have completed their discovery by then. Are the parties jointly
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 8 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Eugene B Chun Chapter 7
requesting an extension of the discovery cutoff? Why doesn't the plaintiff
want this matter sent to mediation? Hearing required.
3/20/17 -- Court approved scheduling order with following dates:
Cont'd status conference -- 7/25/17 at 2:00 p.m.

L/D to file joint status report -- 7/11/17
L/D to complete discovery -- August 1, 2017
L/D to complete mediation -- 7/25/17
L/D to lodge order appointing mediators -- 4/21/17
------------------------------------
Tentative Ruling for July 25, 2017:
Are the parties on track to complete discovery by August 1? Do the parties

anticipate any pretrial motions?
Set pretrial conference and deadline for lodging joint pretrial order. Order
parties to complete a day of mediation prior to date of continued status
conference.
7/26/17 -- Court approved scheduling order with following dates:
Cont'd status conference -- 11/28/17 at 2:00 p.m.

L/D to file joint status report -- 11/14/17
L/D to file pretrial motions -- 10/31/17
L/D to have pretrial motions heard -- 11/28/17
L/D to complete discovery -- 09/30/17
L/D to lodge order appointing mediators -- 08/18/17
L/D to conduct mediation -- 11/27/17
8/22/17 -- Court approved order appointing mediators.
10/2/17 -- Court approved stipulation extending discovery cutoff to October

31, 2017.
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 9 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Eugene B Chun Chapter 7
Where is the status report that should have been filed two weeks before the
status conference? What is the status of this matter? Hearing required.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Eugene B Chun Represented By
Raj T Wadhwani
Defendant(s):
Eugene B Chun Represented By
Jeffrey D Nadel
William W Kim
Plaintiff(s):
Byeong In Cha Represented By
William W Kim
Trustee(s):
Peter J Mastan (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 10 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:16-18509 West Coast Recycling Services, Inc. Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:17-01481 Leslie v. Solis et al
#201.00 Status Conference re: 11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of

property)),(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)) Complaint
by Sam S. Leslie against Alfredo Solis, Mission Recycling, Inc., a California
corporation
Docket 1
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Where is the status report that should have been filed two weeks before the
status conference? What is the status of this matter? Hearing required.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
West Coast Recycling Services, Inc. Represented By
James D. Hornbuckle
Defendant(s):
Alfredo Solis Pro Se
Mission Recycling, Inc., a California Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Sam S. Leslie Represented By
Christian T Kim
James A Dumas Jr
Trustee(s):
Sam S Leslie (TR) Represented By
Christian T Kim
James A Dumas Jr
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 11 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:16-20087 Alex Jaso Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:16-01470 Alaska USA Federal Credit Union v. Jaso
#202.00 Status Conference re: 67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary,

embezzlement, larceny)),Complaint by Alaska USA Federal Credit Union against
Alex Jaso
fr. 1-3-17, 2-14-17, 6-6-17, 8-8-17, 8-22-17
Docket 1
Courtroom Deputy:
6/7/17 - Another summons issued
7/14/17 - Request for entry of default entered

Tentative Ruling:
Why hasn't Ms. Richey been able to make contact with the defendant, Alex
Jaso? What efforts has she made to contact him?
Hearing required.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Alex Jaso Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Alex Jaso Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Alaska USA Federal Credit Union Represented By
Melissa A Vermillion
Trustee(s):
John J Menchaca (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 12 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:17-15965 Sue Yeon Kim Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:17-01350 Barun Technology Co. Ltd. v. Kim
#203.00 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses
Docket 29
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Grant in part and deny in part. Strike without leave to amend affirmative
defenses 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 18. These defenses have no
application in this context or are wholly subsumed within defendant's denials
of plaintiff's allegations.
More specifically, the court is satisfied that the complaint states a claim for
relief (first affirmative defense). Affirmative defenses 2 and 3 do not apply to
an action under section 523(a)(2) or (a)(6). Affirmative defenses 5 and 6 fail
as a matter of law. There is a very short time limit for bringing these actions
and the action was brought in a timely manner. The deadline for
commencing 523 actions was August 28, 2017. The action was commenced
on July 13, 2017. Affirmative defenses 7 through 10 do not apply here.
Defendant is only being sued based on the defendant's own conduct. If
defendant did not personally engage in the conduct in question, there will be
no liability. And there are no DOE defendants (affirmative defense 10).
Estoppel does not apply here (affirmative defense 13). With regard to
affirmative defenses 15, 16 and 17, to the extent that these defenses even
applyin this context, they represent no more than denials of the elements of
plaintiff's case in chief and are superfluous. Affirmative defense 18 is
meaningless and inappropriate. If defendant wants to amend to add
additional defenses, defendant will need to do so in compliance with
applicable rules of procedure.
With regard to affirmative defenses 4, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14, grant with leave to
amend. If defendant believes that there are any facts that support these
defenses, defendant may file an amended answer that sets forth such facts.
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 13 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Sue Yeon Kim Chapter 7
Otherwise, these defenses are meaningless boilerplate that adds nothing.
Defendant should focus her efforts on litigating/disproving the elements of
plaintiff's case in chief.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Sue Yeon Kim Pro Se
Defendant(s):
Sue Yeon Kim Pro Se
Movant(s):
Barun Technology Co. Ltd. Represented By
Young H Bae
Young H Bae
Plaintiff(s):
Barun Technology Co. Ltd. Represented By
Young H Bae
Trustee(s):
Sam S Leslie (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 14 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:16-17847 Ruth Barnes Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:17-01196 Dahan v. Barnes
#204.00 Status Conference re: 41 Objection/revocation of discharge - 727(c), (d),(e))),(62

(Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual
fraud)),(68 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury)) Complaint
by Shmuel and Theodora Dahan against Ruth Barnes
fr. 5-16-17, 8-29-17
Docket 1
Courtroom Deputy:
11/20/17 - Marc Lieberman, (310)284-7350 x 120, has been approved for
telephonic appearance on 11/28/17 @ 2pm
Tentative Ruling:
Tentative Ruling for May 6, 2017:
Explain to debtor the importance of participating in the preparation of joint

status reports and other pretrial procedures as set forth in local bankruptcy
rules. Plaintiff requests that this matter trail UST's 727 action. Continue
status conference to August 29, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. to coincide with status
conference in UST's adversary proceeding.
Tentative Ruling for August 29, 2017:
Continue status conference to same date and time as pretrial conference in

matter no. 207.
---------------------------------
If court grants motion to dismiss 727 action, there is no longer any reason to
trail this action. Set continued status conference and require parties to file
joint status report in connection with that conference.
Party Information
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 15 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Ruth Barnes Chapter 7
Debtor(s):
Ruth Barnes Represented By
Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
Ruth Barnes Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
Shmuel and Theodora Dahan Represented By
Johnny White
Trustee(s):
Howard M Ehrenberg (TR) Pro Se
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 16 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
Adv#: 2:17-01175 United States Trustee (LA) v. Barnes
#205.00 Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Pursuant to Federal Rule of

Bankruptcy Procedure 7041
Docket 23
Courtroom Deputy:
11/20/17 - Marc Lieberman, (310)284-7350 x 120, has been approved for
telephonic appearance on 11/28/17 @ 2pm
Tentative Ruling:
What did plaintiff learn during discovery that makes plaintiff conclude that
pursuing relief under section 727(a)(4)(A) would no longer be appropriate.
The motion never provides any detail to support this conclusory assertion.
Hearing required.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
Ruth Barnes Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
United States Trustee (LA) Represented By
Kelly L Morrison
Trustee(s):
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 17 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
Adv#: 2:17-01175 United States Trustee (LA) v. Barnes
#206.00 Pretrial Conference re: 41 (Objection / revocation of discharge - 727(c),(d),(e)))

Complaint by United States Trustee (LA) against Ruth Barnes
fr. 5-2-17, 8-29-17
Docket 1
*** VACATED *** REASON: CONT'D. TO 1/23/18 @ 2PM
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Court appreciates the declaration of Ms. Morrison explaining why the joint
status report was belatedly filed. Explain to debtor the need to comply with
the court's procedural rules if she intends to represent herself in this action.
Discuss discovery cutoff with parties.
5/4/17 -- Court signed scheduling order with following dates:
Cont'd status conference -- August 29, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.

L/D to file joint status report -- August 15, 2017
L/D to complete discovery -- August 31, 2017
8/18/17 -- Court approved stipulation continuing discovery cutoff to October

16, 2017.
Tentative Ruling for August 29, 2017:
Set pretrial conference for some time in November. Discuss with parties
whether they anticipate filing any pretrial motions.
11/2/17 -- Court granted motion to continue pretrial conference to January 23,

2018 at 2:00 p.m. OFF CALENDAR FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2017.
Party Information
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 18 of 29
Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Ruth Barnes Chapter 7
Debtor(s):
Alan W Forsley
Defendant(s):
Ruth Barnes Pro Se
Plaintiff(s):
United States Trustee (LA) Represented By
Kelly L Morrison
Trustee(s):
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 19 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:13-25661 Chonghee Jane Kim Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:17-01277 Wolkowitz v. TD Foreclosure Services, Inc. et al
#207.00 Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication
Docket 31
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
Court is confused. Although the BAP agreed with this Court's conclusion that
the execution of the deeds of trust in favor of Oh and Hooshim were made
with the actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud Kim's creditors, it also ruled
that the sale of the property to Kim affected the trustee's remedies. The BAP
held that, following this sale, the trustee lacked standing to seek avoidance of
the deeds of trust as a remedy. The trustee could have sought a money
judgment but did not do so, and the BAP asserted that it was too late for the
trustee to bring such a claim in light of the time limits of section 546. (It is
unclear why the choice of remedies would not relate back to the
commencement of the action, but that is what the BAP said.)
The BAP left open the possibility that the trustee might be able to enforce the
deeds of trust on the theory that the deeds of trust travel with the notes and
the trustee might be able to assert that he is a holder in due course of the
notes, but it also noted that "the record does not establish that the Trustee
was the holder in due course of the notes." The BAP observed that, "One,
however, must have more than possession to be a holder; one also must be
named as the payee in the note or the note must be bearer paper. [Citations
omitted.] Here, the record establishes that the notes named Appellants [Oh
and Hooshim] as payees and there is no evidence that the notes were
endorsed in blank or to the Trustee." Has anything changed here? How
does the trustee claim to be a holder in due course of the notes? Does he
even have possession of the original notes? Were the notes ever endorsed
to him or in blank?
Hearing required.
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 20 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Chonghee Jane Kim Chapter 7
On these facts, how can the court grant any of the relief that the trustee is
currently seeking?
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Chonghee Jane Kim Represented By
Young K Chang
Rosendo Gonzalez
Defendant(s):
TD Foreclosure Services, Inc. Represented By
Michael A Coletti
GB INLAND PROPERTIES, LLC Represented By
Kirsten A Worley
Benjamin Hooshim Represented By
Andrew Edward Smyth
Alexandre Oh Represented By
Andrew Edward Smyth
Julie A Taberdo Represented By
Michael A Coletti
Lynn Wolcott Represented By
Michael A Coletti
Andrew Edward Smyth
Plaintiff(s):
Edward M Wolkowitz Represented By
Matthew Abbasi
Trustee(s):
Edward M Wolkowitz (TR) Represented By
Matthew Abbasi
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 21 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
Adv#: 2:17-01277 Wolkowitz v. TD Foreclosure Services, Inc. et al
#207.10 Status Conference re: 14 (Recovery of money/property - other)),(91 (Declaratory

judgment)),(21 (Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property)),(72
(Injunctive relief - other)),(02 (Other (e.g. other actions that would have been
brought in state court if unrelated to bankruptcy))) Complaint by Edward M
Wolkowitz against TD Foreclosure Services, Inc., GB Inland Properties, LLC,
Benjamin Hooshim, Alexandre Oh, Julie A Taberdo, Lynn Wolcott, Chonghee
Jane Kim
fr. 7-25-17, 11-14-17
Docket 1
Courtroom Deputy:
6/27/17 - Request for entry of default against Julie Taberdo
6/27/17 - Request for entry of default against Lynn Wolcott
6/27/17 - Request for entry of default against TD Foreclosure Services, Inc.
Tentative Ruling:
Defaults have been entered as against Lynn Wolcott, Julie Taberdo and TD
Foreclosure Services.
The trustee is of the opinion that there are legal issues that can be resolved
through a motion for partial summary adjudication. Set deadline for the filing
of such motions and continue status conference to a date that can serve as a
date for hearing on those motions.
9/20/17 -- Court approved scheduling order continuing status conference to

November 14, 2017 at 2:00 p.m., ordering parties to file a joint status report
not later than Octoer 31, 2017, ordering trustee to file and serve his motion
for partial summary judgment against GB Inland Properties not later than
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 22 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
September 26, 2017 and set it for hearing on November 14, 2017 at 2:00
p.m. and directing that any motion to vacate a default be filed not later than
September 26, 2017 and set for hearing on or before November 14, 2017 at
2:00 p.m.
----------------------------------
Why didn't the trustee comply with the court's directive to file his motion for
partial summary judgment in time to have it heard on November 14, 2017?
That motion is currently set for November 28, 2017.
Revisit status of action after conclusion of related matter on calendar.
Revisit status of action after conclusion of related matter on calendar.

Party Information
Debtor(s):
Young K Chang
Rosendo Gonzalez
Defendant(s):
TD Foreclosure Services, Inc. Represented By
Michael A Coletti
GB INLAND PROPERTIES, LLC Represented By
Kirsten A Worley
Andrew Edward Smyth
Andrew Edward Smyth
Julie A Taberdo Represented By
Michael A Coletti
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 23 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
Lynn Wolcott Represented By
Michael A Coletti
Andrew Edward Smyth
Plaintiff(s):
Matthew Abbasi
Trustee(s):
Matthew Abbasi
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 24 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
Adv#: 2:14-01456 Wolkowitz v. Hooshim et al
#207.20 Status Conference re: U. S. Court of Appeals Judgment (Memorandum) RE:

Appeal BAP Number: BAP 15-1273; COA 16-60045 - Vacated and Remanded
Docket 146
Courtroom Deputy:
- NONE LISTED -
Tentative Ruling:
- NONE LISTED -
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Young K Chang
Rosendo Gonzalez
Defendant(s):
Andrew Edward Smyth
William J Smyth
Andrew Edward Smyth
William J Smyth
Plaintiff(s):
Matthew Abbasi
Trustee(s):
Matthew Abbasi
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 25 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
2:11-62283 Genius Products LLC Chapter 7
Adv#: 2:15-01241 SIEGEL, CHAPTER 7 TR v. The Weinstein Company LLC et al
#208.00 Trustee's Application For A Temporary Restraining Order And Order To Show
Cause Why A Preliminary Injunction Should Not Issue
Docket 125
Courtroom Deputy:
11/21/17 - Laura Metzger, (212)506-5149, has been approved for telephonic
appearance on 11/28/17 @ 2pm (Listen Only)
Tentative Ruling:
In an appropriate case, a bankruptcy court may issue a temporary restraining
order or preliminary injunction to prohibit the defendant in a fraudulent
transfer action from dissipating assets, but such relief makes the most sense
when there is an identifiable asset that was fraudulently transferred to the
defendant. The point of such an injunction in such an instance is to keep the
asset from being transferred to a BFP who might cutoff the plaintiff's ability to
recover the asset. That is not what is going on here. Here, the assets that
are alleged to have been fraudulently transferred to TWC are not separate
and identifiable. They are funds that have long since been co-mingled or
spent. There is no segregated bank account into which these funds have
been deposited and held.
The stated purpose of the injunction here is to keep the defendant from
dissipating its assets in a fire sale type transaction. The trustee asserts that
an expedited asset sale would be to the detriment of the defendant's
unsecured creditors, of whom the trustee claims (without any evidence to
support this contention) to be the largest. (Even if the trustee is in fact TWC's
single largest unsecured creditor, recent events suggest that TWC may well
have many other unsecured creditors whose claims could in the aggregate
exceed that of the trustee.)
However, even assuming (as this court does) that the issuance of injunctive
relief may be appropriate in the context of a transfer of cash that has long
since been comingled or dissipated, it is far from clear that an injunction
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 26 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
CONT... Genius Products LLC Chapter 7
would be appropriate on these facts. In order to obtain a preliminary
injunction, the plaintiff must establish (1) that he is likely to succeed on the
merits of this action; (2) he is likely to suffer irreparable injury if an injunction
does not issue; (3) the balance of the equities/hardships weighs in favor of
issuance of the injunction; and (4) the public interest, if applicable, weighs in
favor or (or at least does not weigh against) issuance of the injunction. The
court does not believe that the trustee has carried his burden of proof on
these issues.
Likelihood of Success on the Merits

Although the Court was not willing to grant the defendant summary judgment
on the theory that satisfaction of the debtor's pre-existing obligations under a
contract executed several years before the petition necessarily constitutes
reasonably equivalent value, this issue remains a significant potential
obstacle to the trustee's ability to recover. Perhaps the debtor's obligations
did not arise under the agreements until it began to market/distribute a
particular movie, but the court was not prepared to summarily adjudicate this
issue in either direction. Serious questions remain as to whether the trustee
will be able to prevail in light of this problem.
Irreparable Injury
It is far from clear that, but for the issuance of an injunction,TWC will engage
in transactions that are likely to reduce potential recoveries for unsecured
creditors. The Court does not have enough information upon which to base
such a determination. There is no dispute that TWC is currently experiencing
a crisis and that it is exploring various options, but it may well be that
unsecured creditors will have a greater likelihood of recovery if these efforts
are permitted to proceed than if they are encumbered by the issuance of a
preliminary injunction. And, in light of the public interest in all of the activities
of TWC at this point, it is unlikely that TWC will be able to consummate any
transaction without the trustee's knowledge.
Moreover, if, in fact, TWC were to consummate a transfer of its assets in

exchange for less than reasonably equivalent value or as part of an effort to
hinder, delay or defraud its creditors, nothing would prevent the trustee as a
purported creditor of TWC from commencing a fraudulent transfer action
against the transferee(s) of such assets. As there are no identifiable assets
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 27 of 29

Los Angeles
2:00 PM
that the trustee seeks to recover, wouldn't a money judgment against a
transferee be as good as (and perhaps preferable to) a money judgment
against TWC, which is all that the trustee is seeking in this adversary
proceeding?
Balance of Equities/Hardship
The trustee asserts that TWC will suffer no cognizable injury if the court
preserves the status quo by issuing the injunction. The truth of this
contention is far from self-evident. The status quo is not sustainable for
TWC. It may well need to engage in a transaction that will be outside the
ordinary course of its business, whether that be an asset sale or an influx of
capital from a new investor. Is it really appropriate for this court to oversee
that process? The trustee is the holder of a disputed claim against an entity
that may already be insolvent. Would issuance of a preliminary injunction
really preserve the status quo for TWC's unsecured creditors or would it be
likely to make matters worse for all concerned?
Public Interest
The trustee asserts that this factor weighs in favor of issuance of the
injunction as TWC is already in liquidation mode and issuance of the
injunction would ensure a transparent process that would avoid the
dissipation of assets in a manner that only benefits insiders. The Court is not
persuaded. TWC is attempting to negotiate a transaction that would enable it
to remain an operating entity. The interests of numerous third parties would
be adversely affected if this Court were to make consummation of such a
transaction significantly more cumbersome.
Deny.
Party Information
Debtor(s):
Genius Products LLC Pro Se
Defendant(s):
The Weinstein Company LLC Represented By
Mette H Kurth
Alan R Friedman
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 28 of 29
Los Angeles
2:00 PM
The Weinstein Company Holding Represented By
Mette H Kurth
Alan R Friedman
Plaintiff(s):
ALFRED H SIEGEL, CHAPTER 7 Represented By
David B Shemano
James P Menton JR
Trustee(s):
Alfred H Siegel (TR) Represented By
Anthony A Friedman
Alfred H Siegel (TR)
Lindsey L Smith
James P Menton JR
David B Shemano
11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 29 of 29

Bluebond Tentative Ruling

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Bluebond Tentative Ruling

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

United States Bankruptcy Court

Central District of California

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: BANK OF AMERICA, NA

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 1 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: HYUNDAI MOTOR FINANCE

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 2 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: DAIMLER TRUST

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 3 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: FRANK B. STARTUP

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 4 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: LAURA S. LARSON

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 5 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: TD AUTO FINANCE, LLC.

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 6 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

MOVANT: DENAH ELAINE PONCE

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 7 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

FR. 9-27-16, 11-1-16, 3-28-17, 7-25-17

Tentative Ruling for November 1, 2016:

11/3/16 -- Court signed scheduling order setting following dates:

Cont'd status conference -- March 28, 2017 at 2:00 p.m.

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 8 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

3/20/17 -- Court approved scheduling order with following dates:

Cont'd status conference -- 7/25/17 at 2:00 p.m.

Are the parties on track to complete discovery by August 1? Do the parties

7/26/17 -- Court approved scheduling order with following dates:

Cont'd status conference -- 11/28/17 at 2:00 p.m.

8/22/17 -- Court approved order appointing mediators.

10/2/17 -- Court approved stipulation extending discovery cutoff to October

Tentative Ruling for November 28, 2017:

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 9 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 10 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

#201.00 Status Conference re: 11 (Recovery of money/property - 542 turnover of

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 11 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

#202.00 Status Conference re: 67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary,

fr. 1-3-17, 2-14-17, 6-6-17, 8-8-17, 8-22-17

7/14/17 - Request for entry of default entered

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 12 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

#203.00 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 13 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 14 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

#204.00 Status Conference re: 41 Objection/revocation of discharge - 727(c), (d),(e))),(62

fr. 5-16-17, 8-29-17

Explain to debtor the importance of participating in the preparation of joint

Tentative Ruling for August 29, 2017:

Continue status conference to same date and time as pretrial conference in

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 15 of 29

Tuesday, November 28, 2017 Hearing Room 1539

11/27/2017 10:28:09 AM Page 16 of 29