|
|
| SCO Asks Bankruptcy Court to Set April 10 as "Bar Date" For Proofs of Claims |
 |
|
Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:21 PM EST
|
More filings in the SCO bankruptcy. SCO would like to set a deadline of April 10 for all claims to be filed for prepetition claims, so it's filed a motion asking for that relief. There will be a hearing on this motion on March 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM. And two of SCO's lawyers filed documents regarding their bills, looking to be paid. Also, in the SCO v. Novell case in Utah, the parties have stipulated that Novell has until February 19 to file its response to SCO's opposition to Novell's Motion for Summary Judgment on its 4th Claim for Relief.
You'll see SCO talking about a bar date. No. Not that kind of date. It means a legal deadline after which you can't file any more: In every business bankruptcy case where assets are available for distribution there is a deadline for filing proofs of claim. In legal parlance this is referred to as the “bar date”. ...
In Chapter 11, if the bankrupt has not listed the creditors claim, listed it incorrectly, listed it as disputed or contingent then the creditor must file a proof of claim if they want to participate in any distribution of assets from the bankruptcy....
Failure to file the proof of claim by the bar date can result in disallowance of the claim.
The Code permits the debtor and “any party of interest” to object to the proof of claims filed and the Bankruptcy Court may allow or disallow claims regardless of authenticity. This means that the Court may allow contingent claims. If objected to, the Court determines the amount of the claim.
It's up to the Court to set a bar date in Ch. 11. And it's a serious cutoff. You noticed it said if you miss the deadline, it "can result in disallowance." Sounds a bit squishy. But to give you an idea of how it plays out in real life, you'll find two contrasting cases in this recent Morris James' Delaware Business Bankruptcy Report, one where creditors lost out by missing the deadline and one where a failure was excused. Here's the section of the US Bankruptcy Code about claims, and if you scroll down to section 507, you'll find "Priorities".
Here are the bankruptcy filings:
334 -
Filed & Entered: 02/06/2008
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection (No Order Required) Regarding Third Monthly Application of Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP, as Co-Counsel to the Debtors and Debtors in Possession, for the Period from November 1, 2007 through November 30, 2007 (related document(s)[307] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Werkheiser, Rachel)
335 -
Filed & Entered: 02/07/2008
Motion to Approve (B)
Docket Text: Motion to Approve Debtors' Motion for Order Establishing a Bar Date for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving the Form and Manner of Notice Thereof Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 2/29/2008. (Attachments: # (1)
Notice # (2)
Exhibit A # (3) Exhibit B # (4) Exhibit C # (5) Proposed Form of Order # (6) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)
336 -
Filed & Entered: 02/07/2008
Application for Compensation
Docket Text: Quarterly Application for Compensation [First] and Reimbursement of Expenses as Co-Counsel to the Debtors in Possession for the Period from September 14, 2007 through December 31, 2007 Filed by Berger Singerman, P.A.. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 2/27/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Notice # (2) Exhibit A # (3) Exhibit B # (4) Exhibit C # (5) Exhibit D # (6) Certificate of Service and Service List for Fee App # (7) Certificate of Service and Service List for Notice only) (Werkheiser, Rachel)
It all seems a bit surreal to me, since a bar date is set in cases where there are assets available for distribution to creditors, and we won't know if there are or are not any such assets until after the SCO v. Novell trial is over. Novell could conceivably get it all. Not that it looks like it'll be much. But York seems to want the Unix assets, after all. So even if there is no cash left for Novell, there will still be those assets, equipment, etc. Oh. And ... um... SCO's intellectual property. Snark. Speaking of which,
here are the filings in SCO v. Novell:
492 -
Filed & Entered: 02/07/2008
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply
Docket Text: Stipulated MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to [478] MOTION for Summary Judgment on Novell's Fourth Claim for Relief filed by Defendant Novell, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(Sneddon, Heather)
Update: Note correction of bar date: April 10, not 11.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: perpetualLurker on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:26 PM EST |
Please place the description in the title...
Thank you!
.........pL...........
---
"Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance
like nobody's watching." -- Leroy "Satchel" Paige
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:27 PM EST |
How can the date be set for a bar date when we dont know the outcome from Utah
which will have a huge bearing on this? Do you guys think Novell and/or IBM
will be able to file claims appropriately by this date?
On the other hand, this is a good sign for a possible re-org plan, yes?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: perpetualLurker on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:28 PM EST |
A comment in the title would be nice...
Thank you!
.............pL.....................
---
"Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance
like nobody's watching." -- Leroy "Satchel" Paige
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: perpetualLurker on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:29 PM EST |
Thank you!
.....................pL.................
---
"Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance
like nobody's watching." -- Leroy "Satchel" Paige
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Is MS Office adware? - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 10:51 AM EST
- My favorite take on the Micro-yoo! merger - Authored by: josmith42 on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 12:42 PM EST
- Shax - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 01:27 PM EST
- Shax - Authored by: JamesK on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 02:50 PM EST
- Shax - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 07:55 PM EST
- SOG - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 11 2008 @ 02:25 PM EST
- Yahoo: Show us the Money! - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 10:01 PM EST
- A date in April? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 11 2008 @ 01:42 PM EST
- Florida Bar Web Site (Anyone Else?) - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 11 2008 @ 04:20 PM EST
- Floridxa Bar Web-Site: Vendor Lock-in or Incompetent Webmaster? - Authored by: tanner andrews on Monday, February 11 2008 @ 04:28 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 09:58 PM EST |
If this April 11th date passes, Novell can not collect any of its money from
SCO, since the court case in Utah is April 30th. As if I would be surprised.
So even if Novell wins in Utah, it looses all of Novell's money that SCO is
spending.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 10:57 PM EST |
This is TSCOG. Just like a dog that like chasing parked cars, they don't give
up. The question is what will they try next?
You would think that the pain would have started to have an effect on their
actions at this point, but this is TSCOG. Every time I think of the Jethro
Tull's "Thick as a Brick" starts playing in my head.
---
Wayne
http://sourceforge.net/projects/twgs-toolkit/
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 11:01 PM EST |
| After the Novell trial, all that will be left to do is finish winding up SCO and
liquidating the assets. Everyone who has a claim better get it in now because
SCO isn't going to be around much longer.
And so it ends. Not with a bang,
but a whimper.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DannyB on Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 11:39 PM EST |
Dear PJ, you fail to mention other good and valuable assets that SCO will have.
:-)
- Goodwill within the industry
- SCO's valuable brand name
-
SCO's loyal customer base
Aren't those worth something?
---
The
price of freedom is eternal litigation. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: webster on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 01:06 AM EST |
- They can stipulate on some things but not on others. The Bar Date
remains at issue. SCO wants it before Utah. What is their rush to find out how
much they aren't going to pay anybody? This is hardly worth a hearing. Why
work on claims when Novell may win priority due to converted funds?
- SCO wants to collect all these claims so that they will be
wrapped up, discharged, so to speak, with the bankruptcy. So besides Novell,
IBM and others sued by SCO can pile their claims on. Miss the Bar date and they
are barred. Make the bar date and they are discharged in bankruptcy. Expect a
lot of guesstimates.
- For years now SCO has merrily played this
out since their lawyers' fees are capped. It is punishment to IBM and Novell
for not settling relatively cheaply. They are made to burn their own legal
fees. But these parties keep after SCO making one think that they will pursue
claims that may arise from "finalization" and that are not determined by SCO
bankruptcy --certain intentional torts against some veiled
entities.
~ webster ~
Tyrants live
their delusions.
Beware the PIPE
Fairy.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The Bar Date - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 07:45 AM EST
- The Bar Date - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 11 2008 @ 09:15 PM EST
- The Bar Date - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 10:46 AM EST
- The Bar Date - Authored by: elronxenu on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 11:20 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 12:09 PM EST |
Would the bar date prevent shareholders or others from pursuing claims related
to fraud against SCO if they don't submit those claims by the bar date?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2008 @ 10:01 PM EST |
Must... not.... make.... jokes....
PJ.... has.... standards..... on.... her.... blog....
So.... difficult....
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
