TCR_Public/151229.mbx          T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

              Tuesday, December 29, 2015, Vol. 19, No. 363

                            Headlines

ALPHA NATURAL: Intends to Sell Properties in Five States
ALPHA NATURAL: Judge Allows Spruce Pine to Prosecute Suit
AMERICAN HOUSING: Cites Events Raising Going Concern Doubt
ARCHDIOCESE OF SAINT PAUL: Reaches Settlement With Ramsey County
ARCHDIOCESE OF ST. PAUL: Files Rule 2015.3 Periodic Report

ATLAS ENERGY: Moody's Cuts Corporate Family Rating to Caa1
ATNA RESOURCES: Claims Bar Date Set for February 29
ATP OIL: Settles Insurance Action With Former General Counsel
BERNARD L MADOFF: Jan. 26 Hearing on Kingate Disclosure Bid
BERNARD L. MADOFF: BakerHostettler Gets $37M in Fees and Expenses

BERNARD L. MADOFF: Trustee Says $7B Settlement Bars Investor Suit
BLUE SUN: Committee Wants Exclusive Periods Terminated
BROWNING, MT: Threatens Bankruptcy in Dispute with Tribe
CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT: Appeals Order Denying Bid vs. NRF
CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: TD Bank Plan Set for Jan. 6 Confirmation

CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: To File Own Plan, Wants Bank Plan Delayed
CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: Yeshiva Asks Bank to Accept Rabbi Court Order
DECISIONPOINT SYSTEMS: Losses, Deficit Cast Going Concern Doubt
DETROIT, MI: Governor Pitches Pricey Plan to Fix City Schools
ENCLAVE AT BOYNTON: Files Rule 2015.3 Periodic Report

ENERGY FUTURE: 2016 Compensation Programs Approved
EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES: Investors Get Add'l Class Cert. in Enviro Suit
FILMED ENTERTAINMENT: Opposes Committee Bid for Ch. 7 Conversion
FRESH & EASY: To Sell More Stores to CVS for $5.5-Mil.
GARLOCK SEALING: Can't Achieve Cramdown, Says Asbestos Committee

GARLOCK SEALING: Fights With Asbestos Claimants Over Voting Power
GARLOCK SEALING: Insists Current Asbestos Claimants Not Impaired
GARLOCK SEALING: Says FCR Has Right to Vote; PI Panel Disagrees
GENERAL CANNABIS: Posts Net Loss, Has Going Concern Doubt
GOSNELL DEVELOPMENT: Remand Moots HFP Appeal, GDC Dismissal Bid

GREEN EARTH: Admits Going Concern Doubt Due to Limited Capital
INERGETICS INC: Secured Parties to Auction Off Assets on Jan. 14
INVENTERGY GLOBAL: Regains Nasdaq Listing Compliance
KALOBIOS PHARMACEUTICALS: Receives Nasdaq Delisting Notice
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Committee Members Say They Deserve $20M Payback

MOLYCORP INC: Lays Out Financial Estimates for Creditors
NEW GULF RESOURCES: Jan. 6 Meeting Set to Form Creditors' Panel
NU-CAST STEP & SUPPLY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
OCONEE REGIONAL: S&P Lowers Rating on Revenue Debt to 'CC'
PENN VIRGINIA: S&P Lowers CCR to 'CCC', Outlook Negative

PEP BOYS-MANNY: S&P Revises CreditWatch on 'B' CCR to Developing
PINNACLE FOODS: Moody's Confirms Ba3 Corporate Family Rating
RAAM GLOBAL: Files Second Amended Ch. 11 Plan
RED MOUNTAIN: Recurring Losses, Deficit Cast Going Concern Doubt
SCIO DIAMOND: Cites Going Concern Doubt, Management Plans

TERRA-GEN FINANCE: S&P Affirms 'B+' CCR & Revises Outlook to Neg.
TORSPO HOCKEY: Court Denied Joy Group Oy's Bid for TRO
TRILOGY INTERNATIONAL: S&P Lowers Corporate Credit Rating to 'CCC'
TWENTYEIGHTY INC: S&P Lowers CCR to 'CCC'; Outlook Negative
VALLEY FORGE: Thompson Coburn Wants Negligence Claims Dropped

XIANGTIAN (USA): Recurring Losses Cast Going Concern Doubt
[*] For Texas Energy Companies, Chapter 11 Loomed Large in 2015
[*] High Court Asked to Weigh Repose Statutes in $2-Bil. MBS Suit
[^] Large Companies with Insolvent Balance Sheet

                            *********

ALPHA NATURAL: Intends to Sell Properties in Five States
--------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reported that coal operator Alpha Natural
Resources has expanded to nearly two dozen the number of mine
properties it plans to sell as part of its bankruptcy case.

A notice filed by the company's lawyers in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Richmond listed 23 properties to be sold, up from 16 listed in an
October filing.  Fourteen properties are active operations while
the others are closed or are being closed.  Some properties have
several mines.

Fifteen properties are in West Virginia, including Bandmill Coal
Corp., which has four mines, and the Twilight Surface Mine.

Other properties to be sold include the Coalgood Surface Mine, the
Process Energy and EMC No. 9 mines, and Martin County Coal Company
in Kentucky; the Tiller No. 1 Mine in Virginia; Tennessee
Consolidated Coal in Tennessee; and Wabash in Illinois.

Another property, the Twin Star Surface Mine, is listed in both
West Virginia and Virginia.

Bristol, Virginia-based Alpha's notice said Jan. 20 is the deadline
to submit qualified bids or to file any objections to the sale.  If
any property receives more than one bid, an auction would be held
Jan. 27 at the Jones Day law firm's New York offices.

                       About Alpha Natural

Alpha Natural -- http://www.alphanr.com/-- is a coal supplier,    

ranked second largest among publicly traded U.S. coal producers as
measured by 2014 consolidated revenues of $4.3 billion.  

Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (Bankr. E.D. Va. Case No. 15-33896)
and its affiliates filed separate Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions
on Aug. 3, 2015, listing $9.9 billion in total assets as of June
30, 2015, and $7.3 billion in total liabilities as of June 30,
2015.  The petition was signed by Richard H. Verheij, executive
vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary.
Judge Kevin R. Huennekens presides over the case.

David G. Heiman, Esq., Carl E. Black, Esq., and Thomas A. Wilson,
Esq., at Jones Day serve as the Debtors' general counsel.
Tyler P. Brown, Esq., J.R. Smith, Esq., Henry P. (Toby) Long, III,
Esq., and Justin F. Paget, Esq., serve as the Debtors' local
counsel.  Rothschild Group is the Debtors' financial advisor.
Alvarez & Marshal Holdings, LLC, is the Debtors' investment
banker.  Kurtzman Carson Consultants, LLC, is the Debtors' claims
and noticing agent.

The U.S. Trustee for Region 4 appointed seven creditors of Alpha
Natural Resources Inc. to serve on the official committee of
unsecured creditors.


ALPHA NATURAL: Judge Allows Spruce Pine to Prosecute Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge has approved an agreement, which would allow Spruce
Pine Land Co. to prosecute its lawsuit that was automatically
halted by Alpha Natural Resources Inc.'s bankruptcy filing.

Under the agreement, Spruce Pine may continue to prosecute the
lawsuit against the "non-debtor" defendants as long as it does not
violate the so-called automatic stay.

The automatic stay will remain "in full force and effect" with
respect to all claims asserted in the lawsuit against Foundation
Royalty Co. or any other affiliated debtor of Alpha Natural,
according to the court filing.

The agreement was approved by Judge Kevin Huennekens of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Prior to Alpha Natural's bankruptcy filing, Spruce Pine sued
Foundation and 10 other non-debtor defendants in the Circuit Court
for Knott County, in Kentucky.

In its complaint, Spruce Pine asked the court to declare that it
had an option to purchase a real property located in the Kentucky
counties of Knott, Perry and Breathitt pursuant to its agreements
with Little Elk Mining Co.  

Spruce Pine also asked the court to require Little Elk to convey
the property to the company and declare that the property is free
of Foundation's interests under certain royalty deeds.

In October, Spruce Pine filed a motion to lift the automatic stay,
an injunction that halts actions by creditors against a company in
bankruptcy protection.  Alpha Natural opposed the motion, saying
Spruce Pine "fails to establish a prima facie case that cause
exists to lift the automatic stay."

                       About Alpha Natural

Alpha Natural -- http://www.alphanr.com/-- is a coal supplier,
ranked second largest among publicly traded U.S. coal producers as
measured by 2014 consolidated revenues of $4.3 billion.  

Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (Bankr. E.D. Va. Case No. 15-33896)
and its affiliates filed separate Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions
on Aug. 3, 2015, listing $9.9 billion in total assets as of June
30, 2015, and $7.3 billion in total liabilities as of June 30,
2015.  The petition was signed by Richard H. Verheij, executive
vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary.

Judge Kevin R. Huennekens presides over the case.

David G. Heiman, Esq., Carl E. Black, Esq., and Thomas A. Wilson,
Esq., at Jones Day serve as the Debtors' general counsel.

Tyler P. Brown, Esq., J.R. Smith, Esq., Henry P. (Toby) Long, III,
Esq., and Justin F. Paget, Esq., serve as the Debtors' local
counsel.  Rothschild Group is the Debtors' financial advisor.
Alvarez & Marshal Holdings, LLC, is the Debtors' investment banker.
Kurtzman Carson Consultants, LLC, is the Debtors' claims and
noticing agent.

The U.S. Trustee for Region 4 appointed seven creditors of Alpha
Natural Resources Inc. to serve on the official committee of
unsecured creditors.


AMERICAN HOUSING: Cites Events Raising Going Concern Doubt
----------------------------------------------------------
American Housing Income Trust, Inc. noted certain conditions and
events cast substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a
going concern, according to Jeff Howard, president of the company,
in a regulatory filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission on November 12, 2015.

"The company has never paid any dividends and is unlikely to pay
dividends in the immediate or foreseeable future.  The continuation
of the company as a going concern is dependent upon the continued
financial support from its stockholders, the ability of the company
to obtain necessary equity financing to continue operations, and
the attainment of profitable operations.  During the nine months
ended September 30, 2015, the company incurred a net loss of
$2,366,451, and as at September 30, 2015, the company has
accumulated losses of $7,594,674 since inception.

"These factors raise substantial doubt regarding the company's
ability to continue as a going concern."

Mr. Howard further noted: "The company has been successful in
raising cash through equity offerings in the past.  The company has
financing efforts in place to continue to raise cash through equity
offerings.

"Management has developed a plan to continue operations.  This
plans includes obtaining equity financing and reducing expenses.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2015, the company
received $2,926,505 net proceeds.  Although the company has
successfully completed financings, the company cannot assure that
the plans to address these matters in the future will be
successful.

"The company's future capital requirements will depend on numerous
factors including, the effectiveness of its registration statement
on Form S-1 filed with the Commission on October 16, 2015, and the
ability to raise capital following the effectiveness of the Form
S-1.  Furthermore, the company's future acquisition strategy is
contingent upon securing and servicing additional credit facilities
through FirstKey Lending, LLC, or similarly situated lenders.  We
have no assurance that future financing will be available to us on
acceptable terms.  If financing is not available to us on
satisfactory terms, we may be unable to continue, develop or expand
our operations.  Equity financing could result in additional
dilution to our existing shareholders.

"Notwithstanding these risks, which are inherent in any company
under our current circumstances, the company believes that it is
well-positioned from a management and investor relations standpoint
entering into its Fourth Quarter of 2015.  The company's private
offering under Rule 506 of Regulation D resulted in the raising of
capital in excess of $1,000,000 for future acquisitions and
operations, and the formation of AHIT Valfre, LLP was a strategic
move intended to not only increase the company's asset base in the
single family residence space, but to also set the template for
similar growth models in the future.  The company's commitment to
raise additional capital, as set forth in the prospectus under its
registration statement on Form S-1, underscores its intention of
aggressively pursuing its short-term and long-term business plan,
as set forth in its Form S-1.  The company believes it is still
positioned to declare status as a real estate investment trust for
tax year 2015."

At September 30, 2015, the company had total assets of $9,719,101,
total liabilities of $4,375,166, and total shareholders' equity of
$5,343,935.

For the three months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014, the company
reported a net loss of $1,124,089 and $298,122, respectively.  The
change in net loss between the three months ended September 30,
2015 and 2014 was primarily attributable to the increase of
$933,814 in general and administrative expense for the three months
ended September 30, 2015 due to an increase in professional and
consulting fees and overhead expenses.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/q3s5n6a

Phoenix-based American Housing Income Trust, Inc. (AHIT) is a
managed real estate investment company focused on the acquisition
and management of single-family properties in select communities
nationwide.  The company aims to acquire, restore, lease and manage
single-family homes as well-maintained investment properties to
generate attractive risk-adjusted returns over the long-term.



ARCHDIOCESE OF SAINT PAUL: Reaches Settlement With Ramsey County
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maria Wiering at thecatholicspirit.com reported that the
Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and the Ramsey County
Attorney's Office entered into a settlement agreement on Dec. 18,
2015, on a civil petition the county filed against the archdiocese
in June.

Archbishop Bernard Hebda, the archdiocese's apostolic
administrator, called the settlement "the latest and most public
indicator that this archdiocese has earnestly embarked on a journey
of self-reflection, evaluation and action."

The 24-page agreement outlines child protection measures the
archdiocese has already implemented or has promised to implement,
and Ramsey County's oversight of those measures for three years.

Among them are continuing the role of the archdiocese's newly
established Ministerial Review Board in examining claims of clergy
sexual abuse, creating a comprehensive set of policy documents
readily available online, and an increased level of involvement
from lay people at the parish, seminary and school levels.

In the settlement, the archdiocese also agreed to host a conference
for restorative justice and reconciliation for clergy sexual abuse
victims within 18 months of confirmation of a plan for
Reorganization with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

The Dec. 18 settlement agreement is binding pending the bankruptcy
court's approval.

The county filed the civil petition and criminal charges against
the archdiocese June 5 alleging the archdiocese failed to protect
children in the case of former priest Curtis Wehmeyer, who plead
guilty in 2013 of sexually abusing two boys at Blessed Sacrament in
St. Paul in 2010.  The criminal charges involving the archdiocese
are a separate case.

                About the Archdiocese of St. Paul

The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis was originally
established by the Vatican in 1850 and serves a geographical area
consisting of 12 greater Twin Cities metro-area counties in
Minnesota, including Ramsey, Hennepin, Anoka, Carver, Chisago,
Dakota, Goodhue, Le Sueur, Rice, Scott, Washington, and Wright
counties.  There are 187 parishes and approximately 825,000
Catholic individuals in the region.  These individuals and
parishes are served by 3999 priests and 173 deacons.

The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis filed for Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. D. Minn. Case No. 15-30125) in Minnesota on
Jan. 16, 2015, saying it has large and growing liabilities related
to
child sexual abuse and that its pension obligations are
underfunded.

The Debtor disclosed $45,203,010 in assets and $15,890,460 in
liabilities as of the Chapter 11 filing.

The Debtor has tapped Briggs and Morgan, P.A., as Chapter 11
counsel; BGA Management LLC d/b/a Alliance Management as financial
advisor; Lindquist & Vennum LLP as attorney.

Eleven other dioceses have commenced Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases
in the United States to settle claims from current and former
parishioners who say they were sexually molested by priests.

U.S. Trustee for Region 12 appointed five creditors to serve on
the official committee of unsecured creditors.

The U.S. Trustee appointed five creditors to serve on the
Committee of Parish Creditors.  Ginny Dwyer appointed as the
acting
chairperson of the committee until such time as the members can
meet and officially elect their own person.

                             *   *   *

The Debtor's exclusive period for filing a Chapter 11 plan and
disclosure statement ends on Nov. 30, 2015.


ARCHDIOCESE OF ST. PAUL: Files Rule 2015.3 Periodic Report
----------------------------------------------------------
The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis filed a report with
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Minnesota, disclosing that it holds
25% stake in Ausmar Development Co., LLC as of Aug. 17, 2015.

The report was filed pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2015.3, which
required the archdiocese to disclose the value, operations and
profitability of companies in which it holds a substantial or
controlling interest.  

The report is available without charge at http://is.gd/mMDJ2I

                About the Archdiocese of St. Paul

The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis was originally
established by the Vatican in 1850 and serves a geographical area
consisting of 12 greater Twin Cities metro-area counties in
Minnesota, including Ramsey, Hennepin, Anoka, Carver, Chisago,
Dakota, Goodhue, Le Sueur, Rice, Scott, Washington, and Wright
counties.  There are 187 parishes and approximately 825,000
Catholic individuals in the region.  These individuals and parishes
are served by 3999 priests and 173 deacons.

The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis filed for Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. D. Minn. Case No. 15-30125) in Minnesota on Jan.
16, 2015, saying it has large and growing liabilities related to
child sexual abuse and that its pension obligations are
underfunded.

The Debtor disclosed $45,203,010 in assets and $15,890,460 in
liabilities as of the Chapter 11 filing.

The Debtor has tapped Briggs and Morgan, P.A., as Chapter 11
counsel; BGA Management LLC d/b/a Alliance Management as financial
advisor; Lindquist & Vennum LLP as attorney.

Eleven other dioceses have commenced Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases in
the United States to settle claims from current and former
parishioners who say they were sexually molested by priests.

U.S. Trustee for Region 12 appointed five creditors to serve on the
official committee of unsecured creditors.

The U.S. Trustee appointed five creditors to serve on the Committee
of Parish Creditors.  Ginny Dwyer appointed as the acting
chairperson of the committee until such time as the members can
meet and officially elect their own person.


ATLAS ENERGY: Moody's Cuts Corporate Family Rating to Caa1
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service downgraded Atlas Energy Holdings
Operating Company, LLC (Atlas) Corporate Family Rating (CFR) to
Caa1 from B2, its Probability of Default Rating to Caa1-PD from
B2-PD, and its senior unsecured notes rating to Caa3 from Caa1. At
the same time, Moody's changed Atlas's Speculative Grade Liquidity
Rating to SGL-4 from SGL-3. The rating outlook was changed to
negative from stable.

"The downgrade reflects our expectation for high leverage, weak
liquidity and thin interest coverage into 2017 and our assessment
that Atlas will likely undertake a distressed exchange transaction
on a significant amount of its unsecured notes in the very near
future given what we view to be an untenable capital structure, the
deep discount at which the company's bonds trade and Atlas's
ability to issue second and third lien debt," noted John Thieroff,
Moody's Vice President. "Additionally, declining production and a
leveraged full-cycle ratio below 0.5x put added pressure on Atlas
to undertake acquisitions of producing reserves, which will be
difficult to execute given the company's high leverage and very
weak equity currency."

Issuer: Atlas Energy Holdings Operating Company, LLC

Ratings downgraded:

Corporate Family Rating, Downgraded to Caa1 from B2

Probability of Default Rating, Downgraded to Caa1-PD from B2-PD

Senior Unsecured Notes, Downgraded to Caa3 (LGD5) from Caa1
(LGD5)

Ratings Changed:

Speculative Grade Liquidity Rating, Changed to SGL-4 from SGL-3

Outlook Actions:

Outlook Changed to Negative from Stable

Issuer: Atlas Resource Escrow Corporation

Ratings downgraded:

Senior Unsecured Notes, Downgraded to Caa3 (LGD5) from Caa1 (LGD5)

Outlook Actions:

Outlook Changed to Negative from Stable

RATINGS RATIONALE

Atlas Energy Holdings Operating Company's Caa1 Corporate Family
Rating (CFR) reflects its high leverage, limited scale upstream
operations, natural gas-weighted production and reserves, and its
MLP structure which requires high distributions and periodic
acquisitions. The rating is supported by Atlas's low decline mature
wells, high proportion of proved developed reserves (77% as of
December 31, 2014), modestly diversified operations, a meaningful
level of hedging for its production through 2017, as well as
management's willingness to slash distributions by more than 90%
during 2015. The CFR also reflects the company's aggressive
acquisition-led growth strategy common among E&P MLPs, which have
limited internally generated cash to replace and grow production. A
very weak equity unit price and high leverage will likely hinder
Atlas's near-term ability to make acquisitions, which will become
increasingly necessary to stem recent production declines that are
likely to continue into 2017.

The SGL-4 Speculative Grade Liquidity Rating reflects our
expectation of weak liquidity through 2016. Atlas had $137 million
of availability under its secured revolving credit facility and $2
million cash on its balance sheet at September 30, 2015, although
the company has a $21.6 million installment due December 31, 2015
related to a prior acquisition that we expect to be funded under
the revolver. Atlas's borrowing base under its revolver is $700
million and will next be redetermined in May 2016. Atlas has a
significant source of alternate liquidity in its commodity price
hedges, which had a market value of $353 million at September 30,
2015; however, liquidating hedges would further expose the company
to much lower commodity prices and could negatively affect its
borrowing base. The credit facility was amended in November 2015 to
provide Atlas covenant relief and give the company the ability to
issue third lien debt. The total debt/EBITDA covenant was suspended
through 2016 and the senior secured leverage covenant was replaced
by a first lien secured debt/EBITDA covenant of 2.75x. Compliance
under the total debt to EBITDA will resume in the first quarter of
2017 with the covenant level set at 5.75x for the first two
quarters and dropping to 5.0x by the second quarter of 2018. We
project Atlas to maintain compliance with the first lien coverage
covenant through 2016, although without significant cushion.
Atlas's revolving credit facility matures in July 2018.

Atlas's senior unsecured notes are rated Caa3. Although the Moody's
Loss Given Default Methodology indicates a one-notch separation
between the Caa1 CFR and the senior unsecured notes, our
expectation that additional secured debt will be added to the
capital structure in the near term leads us to the conclusion that
continuation of the two-notch separation is appropriate.

The negative outlook reflects the challenges Atlas faces, as an
upstream master limited partnership with declining production, to
reduce leverage while maintaining distributions at a level that
will allow the company to use its equity as currency to fund
acquisitions. The outlook also reflects heightened concerns that
Atlas will seek to undertake a distressed exchange of its unsecured
notes. Ratings could be downgraded if liquidity (availability under
the revolver plus cash on the balance sheet) falls below $75
million or EBITDA to interest coverage appears likely to approach
1x. Although unlikely in 2016, ratings could be upgraded if Atlas
is able to halt production declines and maintain a leveraged
full-cycle cash flow above 1x while sustaining EBITDA to interest
coverage above 2x.

Atlas Energy Holdings Operating Company, LLC is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Atlas Resource Partners, L.P., which is headquartered
in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.



ATNA RESOURCES: Claims Bar Date Set for February 29
---------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado set Feb. 29,
2016, as deadline for person and entities to file proofs of claim
against Atna Resource Inc. and its debtor-affiliates.  The Court
also set May 26, 2016, as the last day for governmental units to
file their claims against the Debtors.

All proofs of claims must be filed at:

   Atna Claims Processing
   c/ Upshot Services LLC
   8269 East 29rd Avenue, Suite 275
   Denver, CO 80238

                      About Atna Resources

Atna Resources, Inc., et al., filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy
petitions
(Bankr. D. Colo. Proposed Lead Case No. 15-22848) on Nov. 18,
2015.
The petition was signed by Rodney D. Gloss as vice president &
chief financial officer.  The Debtors estimated assets in the
range
of $10 million to $50 million and liabilities of $50 million to
$100 million.  Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP represents the Debtors
as counsel.

The Company's business is to explore, acquire, develop, and mine
precious metals, uranium and other mineral properties.


ATP OIL: Settles Insurance Action With Former General Counsel
-------------------------------------------------------------
Stewart Bishop at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that a Texas federal
judge on Dec. 18, 2015, signed off on a deal between the trustee
for bankrupt ATP Oil & Gas Corp. and its former general counsel,
which resolves malpractice and other claims against the onetime
in-house lawyer for allegedly failing to make a timely claim to
ATP's insurers for defense costs from environmental litigation.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Marvin Isgur gave the green light to the
settlement dropping claims against John Tschirhart in exchange for
$50,000, which represents the estate's remainder of attorneys'
fees.

                           About ATP Oil

Houston, Texas-based ATP Oil & Gas Corporation is an international
offshore oil and gas development and production company focused in
the Gulf of Mexico, Mediterranean Sea and North Sea.

ATP Oil & Gas filed a Chapter 11 petition (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case
No. 12-36187) on Aug. 17, 2012.  Attorneys at Mayer Brown LLP,
serve as bankruptcy counsel.  Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, P.C., is
the conflicts counsel.  Motley Rice LLC and Fayard & Honeycutt,
APC serve as special counsel.  Opportune LLP is the financial
advisor and Jefferies & Company is the investment banker.

Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC is the claims and notice agent.

ATP disclosed assets of $3.6 billion and $3.5 billion of
liabilities as of March 31, 2012.  Debt includes $365 million on a
first-lien loan where Credit Suisse AG serves as agent.  There is
$1.5 billion on second-lien notes with Bank of New York
MellonTrust Co. as agent.  ATP's other debt includes $35 million on
convertible notes and $23.4 million owing to third parties for
their shares of production revenue.  Trade suppliers have claims
for $147 million, ATP said in a court filing.

An official committee of unsecured creditors has been appointed in
the case.  Evan R. Fleck, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley &
McCloy, in New York, represents the Creditors Committee as
counsel.

A seven-member panel of equity security holders has also been
appointed in the case.  Kyung S. Lee, Esq., and Charles M. Rubio,
Esq. of Diamond McCarthy LLP, in Houston, Texas, serve as counsel
to the Equity Committee.

Judge Marvin Isgur of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division, issued an order on June 26,
2014, converting ATP Oil & Gas Corporation's Chapter 11 case to
one under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code.


BERNARD L MADOFF: Jan. 26 Hearing on Kingate Disclosure Bid
-----------------------------------------------------------
The joint liquidators of Kingate Euro Fund Ltd. and Kingate Global
Fund Ltd. ask the High Court of the British Virgin Islands to
direct that documents containing information regarding identities
and transactions with the funds may be disclosed to Irving H.
Picard, the trustee of the liquidation estate of Bernard L. Madoff
Investment securities LLC, in order to comply with U.S. Federal
Rules of Civil Procedures and any order of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court in the Matter of SIPC v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Secs. LLC No.
08-1789 (SMB), Picard V. Ceretti, et al., Adv. Proc. No. 09-1161
(SMB) (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.)

The application will be heard by the High Court of British Virgin
Islands on Jan. 26, 2016.  Further information of the application,
contact equiries@kingateeuro-liquidation.vg

                     About Bernard L. Madoff

Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC and Bernard L. Madoff
orchestrated the largest Ponzi scheme in history, with losses
topping US$50 billion.  On Dec. 15, 2008, the Honorable Louis A.
Stanton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York granted the application of the Securities Investor
Protection Corporation for a decree adjudicating that the customers
of BLMIS are in need of the protection afforded by the Securities
Investor Protection Act of 1970.  The District Court's Protective
Order (i) appointed Irving H. Picard, Esq., as trustee for the
liquidation of BLMIS, (ii) appointed Baker & Hostetler LLP as his
counsel, and (iii) removed the SIPA Liquidation proceeding to the
Bankruptcy Court (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Adv. Pro. No. 08-01789) (Lifland,
J.).  Mr. Picard has retained AlixPartners LLP as claims agent.

On April 13, 2009, former BLMIS clients filed an involuntary
Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition against Bernard Madoff (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. 09-11893).  The petitioning creditors -- Blumenthal &
Associates Florida General Partnership, Martin Rappaport
Charitable Remainder Unitrust, Martin Rappaport, Marc Cherno, and
Steven Morganstern -- assert US$64 million in claims against  Mr.
Madoff based on the balances contained in the last statements they
got from BLMIS.

On April 14, 2009, Grant Thornton UK LLP as receiver placed Madoff
Securities International Limited in London under bankruptcy
protection pursuant to Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code
(Bankr. S.D. Fla. 09-16751).  The Chapter 15 case was later
transferred to Manhattan.  In June 2009, Judge Lifland approved the
consolidation of the Madoff SIPA proceedings and the bankruptcy
case.

Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York on June 29, 2009, sentenced Mr. Madoff to 150
years of life imprisonment for defrauding investors in United
States v. Madoff, No. 09-CR-213 (S.D.N.Y.).

From recoveries in lawsuits coupled with money advanced by SIPC,
Mr. Picard has commenced distributions to victims.  As of the end
of May 2015, the SIPA Trustee has recovered more than $10.699
billion and has distributed approximately $7.576 billion.  When
additional settlements awaiting distribution are taken into
account, the recovery in the Madoff liquidation proceeding totals
$10.734 billion.


BERNARD L. MADOFF: BakerHostettler Gets $37M in Fees and Expenses
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Randles at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that a New York
bankruptcy judge approved payment of more than $37 million in fees
and expenses to BakerHostettler for work that the firm has done
unraveling Bernie Madoff's bogus securities firm and securing money
to pay back victims of the scheme.

The multimillion dollar payout to BakerHostettler was among more
than a dozen payments to more than a dozen law firms involved in
the Madoff case that were approved on Dec. 17, 2015, by U.S.
Bankruptcy Judge Stuart Bernstein.  BakerHostettler partner Irving
Picard has served as trustee.

                     About Bernard L. Madoff

Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC and Bernard L. Madoff
orchestrated the largest Ponzi scheme in history, with losses
topping US$50 billion.  On Dec. 15, 2008, the Honorable Louis A.
Stanton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New
York granted the application of the Securities Investor Protection
Corporation for a decree adjudicating that the customers of BLMIS
are in need of the protection afforded by the Securities Investor
Protection Act of 1970.  The District Court's Protective Order (i)
appointed Irving H. Picard, Esq., as trustee for the liquidation
of
BLMIS, (ii) appointed Baker & Hostetler LLP as his counsel, and
(iii) removed the SIPA Liquidation proceeding to the Bankruptcy
Court (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Adv. Pro. No. 08-01789) (Lifland, J.).  Mr.
Picard has retained AlixPartners LLP as claims agent.

On April 13, 2009, former BLMIS clients filed an involuntary
Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition against Bernard Madoff (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. 09-11893).  The petitioning creditors -- Blumenthal &
Associates Florida General Partnership, Martin Rappaport
Charitable
Remainder Unitrust, Martin Rappaport, Marc Cherno, and Steven
Morganstern -- assert US$64 million in claims against  Mr. Madoff
based on the balances contained in the last statements they got
from BLMIS.

On April 14, 2009, Grant Thornton UK LLP as receiver placed Madoff
Securities International Limited in London under bankruptcy
protection pursuant to Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code
(Bankr. S.D. Fla. 09-16751).  The Chapter 15 case was later
transferred to Manhattan.  In June 2009, Judge Lifland approved
the
consolidation of the Madoff SIPA proceedings and the bankruptcy
case.

Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York on June 29, 2009, sentenced Mr. Madoff to 150
years of life imprisonment for defrauding investors in United
States v. Madoff, No. 09-CR-213 (S.D.N.Y.).

From recoveries in lawsuits coupled with money advanced by SIPC,
Mr. Picard has commenced distributions to victims.  As of the end
of May 2015, the SIPA Trustee has recovered more than $10.699
billion and has distributed approximately $7.576 billion.  When
additional settlements awaiting distribution are taken into
account, the recovery in the Madoff liquidation proceeding totals
$10.734 billion.


BERNARD L. MADOFF: Trustee Says $7B Settlement Bars Investor Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Randles at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that the trustee
overseeing the liquidation of Bernie Madoff's securities firm moved
on Dec. 18, 2015, to block an investor lawsuit against one of
Madoff's former clients, telling a New York bankruptcy judge that
the litigation is barred by a $7.2 billion settlement from 2011.
Madoff trustee Irving Picard said in court papers that the lawsuit,
which seeks damages against the estate of former Madoff investor
Jeffery Picower, is blocked by the settlement.  The plaintiffs who
filed the complaint are Adele Fox, Susanne Stone Marwill, Marsha
Peshkin, and Russell Oasis, among others.

                     About Bernard L. Madoff

Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC and Bernard L. Madoff
orchestrated the largest Ponzi scheme in history, with losses
topping US$50 billion.  On Dec. 15, 2008, the Honorable Louis A.
Stanton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New
York granted the application of the Securities Investor Protection
Corporation for a decree adjudicating that the customers of BLMIS
are in need of the protection afforded by the Securities Investor
Protection Act of 1970.  The District Court's Protective Order (i)
appointed Irving H. Picard, Esq., as trustee for the liquidation
of
BLMIS, (ii) appointed Baker & Hostetler LLP as his counsel, and
(iii) removed the SIPA Liquidation proceeding to the Bankruptcy
Court (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Adv. Pro. No. 08-01789) (Lifland, J.).  Mr.
Picard has retained AlixPartners LLP as claims agent.

On April 13, 2009, former BLMIS clients filed an involuntary
Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition against Bernard Madoff (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. 09-11893).  The petitioning creditors -- Blumenthal &
Associates Florida General Partnership, Martin Rappaport
Charitable
Remainder Unitrust, Martin Rappaport, Marc Cherno, and Steven
Morganstern -- assert US$64 million in claims against  Mr. Madoff
based on the balances contained in the last statements they got
from BLMIS.

On April 14, 2009, Grant Thornton UK LLP as receiver placed Madoff
Securities International Limited in London under bankruptcy
protection pursuant to Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code
(Bankr. S.D. Fla. 09-16751).  The Chapter 15 case was later
transferred to Manhattan.  In June 2009, Judge Lifland approved
the
consolidation of the Madoff SIPA proceedings and the bankruptcy
case.

Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York on June 29, 2009, sentenced Mr. Madoff to 150
years of life imprisonment for defrauding investors in United
States v. Madoff, No. 09-CR-213 (S.D.N.Y.).

From recoveries in lawsuits coupled with money advanced by SIPC,
Mr. Picard has commenced distributions to victims.  As of the end
of May 2015, the SIPA Trustee has recovered more than $10.699
billion and has distributed approximately $7.576 billion.  When
additional settlements awaiting distribution are taken into
account, the recovery in the Madoff liquidation proceeding totals
$10.734 billion.


BLUE SUN: Committee Wants Exclusive Periods Terminated
------------------------------------------------------
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in the Chapter 11
cases of Blue Sun St. Joe Refining, LLC, et al., ask the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri to terminate
the exclusive periods to file and solicit acceptance for that
plan.

According to the Committee, from the beginning of the cases, the
Debtors' sole focus has been to find a way to transfer their assets
to The John and Joann Horton Family Limited Partnership and pay
nothing to unsecured creditors.  The Committee tells the Court that
it has been kept in the dark on the Debtors' proposed plan and sale
process until now.    In this relation, the Committee intends to
propose a Plan that is fair, equitable and in the best interests of
all creditors.  Unless exclusivity is terminated now, these
bankruptcy cases will likely be converted, the Committee asserts.

The Troubled Company Reporter, on Dec. 9, 2015, reported that the
Debtors filed a Joint Plan of Liquidation that will be funded from
what's left of the estates after the $4.76 million credit-bid sale
of most of the assets to Joann Horton Family Limited Partnership.

The Debtors have determined that the only viable exit for the
Chapter 11 cases was through a sale of their assets. During
September and October 2015, MCA Financial Group, Ltd., with input
from the Debtors, researched and identified 76 potential
interested
parties (which included 20 private equity firms).  MCA continues
to
follow up with potential interested parties in an effort to
encourage competitive bidding.

Under the terms of the Plan, the Debtors intend to complete the
sale of most of the assets to Horton or the highest bidder,
transfer avoidance actions to a liquidating trust and paying all
administrative expense and unsecured claims from any recovery from
those avoidance actions.

A copy of the Disclosure Statement filed Nov. 12, 2015, is
available for free at:

         http://bankrupt.com/misc/Blue_Sun_158_DS.pdf

                      About Blue Sun St. Joe

Originally founded in 2001 as SunFuels, Inc., privately-held Blue
Sun Energy Inc. introduced biodiesel into the existing petroleum
fuels pool by focusing on an integrated approach to addressing
market needs.  In 2004, Blue Sun Energy developed the proprietary
Fusion(TM) brand of biodiesel fuel.  Early in 2012, Blue Sun
Biodiesel also established a downstream terminal presence for
biodiesel blending in Knoxville, TN.  In 2012, Blue Sun St. Joe
Refining began operating the St. Joe refinery to produce
high-quality biodiesel for wholesale distribution.

Blue Sun St. Joe Refining, LLC, and its three affiliates sought
protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. W.D.
Mo., Case No. 15-42231) on July 31, 2015.  The cases are assigned
to Judge Arthur B. Federman.

The Debtors engaged as bankruptcy counsel Jeffrey A. Deines, Esq.,
at Lentz Clark Deines PA, in Overland Park, Kansas; and Todd A.
Burgess, Esq., John R. Clemency, Esq., and Lindsi M. Weber, Esq.,
at Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A., in Phoenix, Arizona.  MCA Financial
Group, Ltd. serves as their financial advisors.

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors retained Stinson
Leonard Street LLP as its counsel.


BROWNING, MT: Threatens Bankruptcy in Dispute with Tribe
--------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reported that officials in a small Montana
town say they will have to disincorporate the community or file for
bankruptcy over an ongoing dispute with the Blackfeet Tribe about
water and utility services.

According to AP, citing the Flathead Beacon, the town of Browning
said it was in a dire financial condition because of a legal battle
with the tribe.


CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT: Appeals Order Denying Bid vs. NRF
--------------------------------------------------------
Caesars Entertainment Corp. and its debtor-affiliates filed an
appeal from the Bankruptcy Court's order denying their motion to
enforce the automatic stay against The Board of Trustees of the
National Retirement Fund and The Pension Plan of the National
Retirement Fund.

The NRF is a pension fund that sponsors a plan in which five
Caesars companies were participating employers.  The Debtors' first
motion asserts the NRF violated the stay when it expelled the five
Caesars employers from the plan.  The second motion charges the NRF
with violating the stay again when it sent two other Caesars
companies a notice and demand for payment of the withdrawal
liability.  The Debtors want both the expulsion and the notice and
payment demand declared void.

Judge A. Benjamin Goldgar denied the motions to enforce the
automatic stay.  According to the ruling, as the NRF rightly notes,
the stay protects only a debtor in a bankruptcy case, property of a
debtor, and property of a debtor's bankruptcy estate.  Non-debtors
and their property are not protected.  Since all the NRF's actions
in expelling the Caesars employers and attempting to collect
withdrawal liability were directed at non-debtors, the NRF did not
violate the stay.

                   About Caesars Entertainment

Caesars Entertainment Corp., formerly Harrah's Entertainment Inc.,
is one of the world's largest casino companies.  Caesars casino
resorts operate under the Caesars, Bally's, Flamingo, Grand
Casinos, Hilton and Paris brand names.  The Company has its
corporate headquarters in Las Vegas.  Harrah's announced its
re-branding to Caesar's in mid-November 2010.

In January 2015, Caesars Entertainment and subsidiary Caesars
Entertainment Operating Company, Inc., announced that holders of
more than 60% of claims in respect of CEOC's 11.25% senior secured
notes due 2017, CEOC's 8.5% senior secured notes due 2020 and
CEOC's 9% senior secured notes due 2020 have signed the Amended and
Restated Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement, dated as
of Dec. 31, 2014, among Caesars Entertainment, CEOC and the
Consenting Creditors.  As a result, The RSA became effective
pursuant to its terms as of Jan. 9, 2015.

Appaloosa Investment Limited, et al., owed $41 million on account
of 10% second lien notes in the company, filed an involuntary
Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition against CEOC (Bankr. D. Del. Case
No. 15-10047) on Jan. 12, 2015.  The bondholders are represented by
Robert S. Brady, Esq., at Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor LLP.

CEOC and 172 other affiliates -- operators of 38 gaming and resort
properties in 14 U.S. states and 5 countries -- filed Chapter 11
bankruptcy petitions (Bank. N.D. Ill.  Lead Case No. 15-01145) on
Jan. 15, 2015.  CEOC disclosed total assets of $12.3 billion and
total debt of $19.8 billion as of Sept. 30, 2014.

Delaware Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross entered a ruling that the
bankruptcy proceedings will proceed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
for the Northern District of Illinois.

Kirkland & Ellis serves as the Debtors' counsel.  AlixPartners is
the Debtors' restructuring advisors.  Prime Clerk LLC acts as the
Debtors' notice and claims agent.  Judge Benjamin Goldgar presides
over the cases.

The U.S. Trustee has appointed seven noteholders to serve in the
Official Committee of Second Priority Noteholders and nine members
to serve in the Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee.

The U.S. Trustee appointed Richard S. Davis as Chapter 11
examiner.

On Feb. 5, 2015, U.S. Trustee Patrick Layng appointed nine
creditors to the Debtors' official committee of unsecured
creditors.  Two of these creditors -- the Board of Levee
Commissioners for the Yazoo Mississippi Delta and MeehanCombs
Global Credit Opportunities Master Fund LP -- resigned from the
committee following their appointment.  They were replaced by the
National Retirement Fund and Relative Value-Long/Short Debt, a
Series of Underlying Funds Trust.


CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: TD Bank Plan Set for Jan. 6 Confirmation
--------------------------------------------------------------
TD Bank, N.A., won approval from the Bankruptcy Court of the
disclosure statement explaining its proposed Chapter 11 plan for
Congregation Birchos Yosef and scheduled a Jan. 6, 2016 hearing for
confirmation of the Plan.

Judge Robert D. Drain ruled that the Disclosure Statement, dated
December 4, 2015, is approved as containing adequate information
within the meaning of Section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code.

Ballots to accept or reject the Plan must be completed, signed, and
sent so as to be actually received by the Balloting Agent on or
before 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Eastern time) on January 4, 2015 at
the following address (i) by first class mail: McCarter & English,
LLP, Attn: Matthew Heimann, Four Gateway Center, 100 Mulberry
Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102 (the "Balloting Agent"), (ii) by
facsimile to the Balloting Agent at (973) 297-3863, or (iii) by
electronic mail to the Balloting Agent at mheimann@mccarter.com

The Confirmation Hearing will be held before the Honorable Robert
D. Drain, United States Bankruptcy Judge, at the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, 300
Quarropas Street, White Plains, New York 10601, on January 6, 2016
at 10:00 a.m. (prevailing Eastern time), as such date may be
continued or adjourned by the Court.

Objections or proposed modifications, if any, to the Plan must be
in writing and must be filed no later than 12:00 noon (prevailing
Eastern time) on Jan. 4, 2015.

TD Bank's attorneys can be reached at:

         Joseph Lubertazzi, Jr.
         MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
         Four Gateway Center
         100 Mulberry Street
         Newark, NJ 07102-4056
         Tel: 973-639-2082
         Fax: 973-297-3940
         E-mail: jlubertazzi@mccarter.com

                          TD Bank's Plan

Secured creditor TD Bank, N.A. on Dec. 4, 2015, submitted a Second
Amended Disclosure Statement.

TD Bank's proposed Chapter 11 plan for Congregation Birchos Yosef
provides for the swift sale of the Debtor's real property, and the
use of those sale proceeds and other proceeds to pay creditors in
full.

TD Bank is the largest secured creditor holding a secured claim in
excess of $9.2 million.

According to the Amended Disclosure Statement, the Plan provides
that:

   -- The secured claim of TD Bank (Class 1), in the amount of not
less than $9.22 million plus postpetition interest at 9% per annum,
will be paid from the net proceeds of the sale of the mortgage
properties.  To the extent that the net proceeds are less than the
amount of the TD secured claim, the deficiency portion will be
treated as an allowed unsecured claim.

   -- The secured claim of the Internal Revenue Service (Class 2),
in the amount of $255,000 as of the Petition Date, will be paid
from the proceeds of the sale of the properties covered by IRS'
liens.

   -- Mechanic's lien claims (Class 3), if allowed, will be paid
from the net proceeds from the sale of the 201 Route 306 property
after satisfying the closing costs, the real property tax claims,
and the TD secured claim.

   -- As to the secured claim of TCRF Equipment Finance (Class 4),
TCF will repossess the vehicles to satisfy the secured claim, with
any deficiency portion to be treated as an allowed unsecured
claim.

   -- General unsecured claims (Class 5), estimated at $1 million
plus any deficiency claims will be paid in full from the available
cash or the litigation proceeds.

   -- There are no holders of equity interests (Class 6) as the
Debtor is a non-profit organization.  All property of the estate
that remains after the final distribution date will become property
of the Debtor, as reorganized.

A copy of the Second Amended Disclosure Statement dated Dec. 4,
2015, is available for free at:

   http://bankrupt.com/misc/Cong_Birchos_191_2nd_Am_DS.pdf

                 About Congregation Birchos Yosef

Congregation Birchos Yosef is a religious corporation which was
formed on Jan. 16, 1985 for the purposes of creating and
maintaining a "House of Worship" in accordance with the traditions
of the Hebrew faith and to serve and advance the affairs of the
surrounding community under the leadership of the Grand Rebbe of
Nikolsburg.  Its principal office is located at 201 Route 306,
Monsey, New York.  It has real properties located in Spring Valley
and Monsey, New York.

Congregation Birchos Yosef sought bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 15-22254) in White Plains, New York, on Feb. 26,
2015.  Breindy Lebovits, the vice-president, signed the petition.

The Debtor estimated assets and debt of $10 million to $50
million.

On May 4, 2015, the Debtor won approval to hire (i) Pick & Zabicki
LLP as its counsel, (ii) Frances M. Caruso as its bookkeeper and
(iii) Montalbano, Condon & Frank, P.C. as special counsel for real
property tax-related matters.  On May 18, the Court authorized the
Debtor's retention of Levine & Associates, PC as special litigation
counsel.  On Sept. 11, 2015, the Court approved the retention of
The Law Offices of David Carlebach, Esq. as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel.  On Nov. 11, 2015, the Debtor filed
a stipulation of substitution of counsel, reflecting that The Law
Offices of Allen A. Kolber, Esq. will serve as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel

                           *     *     *

The Debtor's "exclusivity period" under Section 1121 of the
Bankruptcy Code expired June 26, 2015.

On Aug. 24, 2015, the Court entered a memorandum of decision in
support of its order granting the Debtor's motion to enforce the
automatic stay against Bais Chinuch L'Bonois, Inc. and certain
individuals.  This order is being appealed.

TD Bank, N.A., scheduled a Jan. 6, 2016 hearing to seek
confirmation of its proposed Chapter 11 plan for the Debtor.


CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: To File Own Plan, Wants Bank Plan Delayed
---------------------------------------------------------------
Congregation Birchos Yosef's attorneys informed the Bankruptcy
Court that the Debtor intends to file its own Chapter 11 plan, thus
it wants the Court to postpone the Jan. 6 hearing on TD Bank's
proposed Chapter 11 plan for the Debtor to February.

In a Dec. 15, 2015 letter, Allen A. Kolber, Esq., wrote:

"Pursuant to the hearing on Nov. 6, 2015, the Court had ruled that
that the hearing on the confirmation of TD Bank's Chapter 11 Plan
would be scheduled for two alternative dates, depending on the Beit
Din ruling.

"In the event that the Beth Din decision was not rendered by Dec.
5, 2015, or was adverse to the Debtor's possessory rights in the
subject property, the Confirmation Hearing would be scheduled for
Jan. 6, 2016.

"In the event that the Beth Din decision was issued by Dec. 5, 2015
and ruled that the Debtor would remain in possession of the subject
property, the parties should obtain a later hearing date from Ms.
Dorothy Li in the beginning of Feb., 2016.

"Jan. 5, 2016 was merely a holding date, not a confirmation date.
The Court also stated that it would not enter an Order until the
Beit Din ruled.

"On Dec. 1, 2015, the Beth Din ruled with regard to the property,
giving possession of the property to the Debtor.  However, on Dec.
5, 2015, the attorneys for TD Bank uploaded an Order and served
their Chapter 11 Plan and scheduled a confirmation date of Jan. 5,
2016, in contradiction to the Court's Order.

"On Dec. 7, 2015, Michael Levine, Esq., wrote a letter to Chambers
requesting that the hearing date be scheduled for a later date in
February, to enable the Debtor to finalize necessary funding and
submit a competing Plan.

"On Sunday I met with the Debtor's representatives to discuss
financing a competing, non sale Plan.  They advised me that the
Jewish Community has been reluctant to commit to financing due not
only to the Bankruptcy case, but due to the Beit Din's pending
arbitration.  Now that the Beit Din has ruled, the investors have a
more definite assessment of the Debtor's financial situation and
can resume discussions with the Debtor.

"I also confirmed that the Debtor's have another investor who has
now made an offer of $4 million now that the Beit Din has ruled.
Debtor intends to serve a Competing Plan, based upon the most
recent available financing obtained by the Debtor.  However, Debtor
needs the additional 30 days or so to obtain this financing, as the
Court ruled, "If it's scenario two, I think it's in everyone's best
interest to step back a second and look and see if there can be a
refinancing here".

"I have spoken with the attorney for TD Bank, Joseph Lubertazzi,
Jr., Esq., and he has advised me that he will not join in my
request to adjourn the Confirmation Hearing to February.
Furthermore, Mr. Lubertazzi advised me that if we did not have a
counter plan submitted to him by December 20, 2015, and supply
certain information and documentation to him by that date, he would
have to prepare for the January 5, 2016 Confirmation Hearing.  Mr.
Lubertazzi stated to me that this preparation would involve legal
research, a memorandum of law, accounting and drafting of numerous
documents which could reach an enormous sum in legal fees. (I will
not quote his sum, as I know Mr. Lubertazzi was exaggerating, but
there is no doubt that exorbitant fees would be incurred by TD and
ultimately assessed against the Debtor's estate."

"Based upon these facts, Debtor respectfully requests that he Court
adjourn the Confirmation Hearing to a date in February 2016."

Counsel to the Debtor:

         LAW OFFICES OF ALLEN A. KOLBER, ESQ.
         134 Route 59, Suite A
         Suffern, New York 10901
         Telephone: (845) 918-1277
         Facsimile: (845) 369-1618
         E-mail: aKolber@KolberLegal.com

                          TD Bank's Plan

TD Bank's proposed Chapter 11 plan for Congregation Birchos Yosef
provides for the swift sale of the Debtor's real property, and the
use of those sale proceeds and other proceeds to pay creditors in
full.

TD Bank is the largest secured creditor holding a secured claim in
excess of $9.2 million.

According to the Amended Disclosure Statement, the Plan provides
that:

   -- The secured claim of TD Bank (Class 1), in the amount of not
less than $9.22 million plus postpetition interest at 9% per annum,
will be paid from the net proceeds of the sale of the mortgage
properties.  To the extent that the net proceeds are less than the
amount of the TD secured claim, the deficiency portion will be
treated as an allowed unsecured claim.

   -- The secured claim of the Internal Revenue Service (Class 2),
in the amount of $255,000 as of the Petition Date, will be paid
from the proceeds of the sale of the properties covered by IRS'
liens.

   -- Mechanic's lien claims (Class 3), if allowed, will be paid
from the net proceeds from the sale of the 201 Route 306 property
after satisfying the closing costs, the real property tax claims,
and the TD secured claim.

   -- As to the secured claim of TCRF Equipment Finance (Class 4),
TCF will repossess the vehicles to satisfy the secured claim, with
any deficiency portion to be treated as an allowed unsecured
claim.

   -- General unsecured claims (Class 5), estimated at $1 million
plus any deficiency claims will be paid in full from the available
cash or the litigation proceeds.

   -- There are no holders of equity interests (Class 6) as the
Debtor is a non-profit organization.  All property of the estate
that remains after the final distribution date will become property
of the Debtor, as reorganized.

A copy of the Second Amended Disclosure Statement dated Dec. 4,
2015, is available for free at:

   http://bankrupt.com/misc/Cong_Birchos_191_2nd_Am_DS.pdf

                 About Congregation Birchos Yosef

Congregation Birchos Yosef is a religious corporation which was
formed on Jan. 16, 1985 for the purposes of creating and
maintaining a "House of Worship" in accordance with the traditions
of the Hebrew faith and to serve and advance the affairs of the
surrounding community under the leadership of the Grand Rebbe of
Nikolsburg.  Its principal office is located at 201 Route 306,
Monsey, New York.  It has real properties located in Spring Valley
and Monsey, New York.

Congregation Birchos Yosef sought bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 15-22254) in White Plains, New York, on Feb. 26,
2015.  Breindy Lebovits, the vice-president, signed the petition.

The Debtor estimated assets and debt of $10 million to $50
million.

On May 4, 2015, the Debtor won approval to hire (i) Pick & Zabicki
LLP as its counsel, (ii) Frances M. Caruso as its bookkeeper and
(iii) Montalbano, Condon & Frank, P.C. as special counsel for real
property tax-related matters.  On May 18, the Court authorized the
Debtor's retention of Levine & Associates, PC as special litigation
counsel.  On Sept. 11, 2015, the Court approved the retention of
The Law Offices of David Carlebach, Esq. as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel.  On Nov. 11, 2015, the Debtor filed
a stipulation of substitution of counsel, reflecting that The Law
Offices of Allen A. Kolber, Esq. will serve as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel

                           *     *     *

The Debtor's "exclusivity period" under Section 1121 of the
Bankruptcy Code expired June 26, 2015.

On Aug. 24, 2015, the Court entered a memorandum of decision in
support of its order granting the Debtor's motion to enforce the
automatic stay against Bais Chinuch L'Bonois, Inc. and certain
individuals.  This order is being appealed.

TD Bank, N.A., scheduled a Jan. 6, 2016 hearing to seek
confirmation of its proposed Chapter 11 plan for the Debtor.


CONGREGATION BIRCHOS: Yeshiva Asks Bank to Accept Rabbi Court Order
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeshiva Ohr Torah wants TD Bank, N.A. to revise its proposed Second
Amended Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization for Congregation Birchos
Yosef to provide that it will be allowed to stay until August 2016
at a property in Monsey, New York.

Yeshiva Ohr Torah is using the property as it teaches Cassidic and
Orthodox traditions.

Kenneth M. Lewis, Esq., explains that pursuant to a lease agreement
dated Oct. 17, 2012, between Congregation Birchos Yosef and Yeshiva
Ohr Torah, the Yeshiva leased certain real property located at 201
Route 306 in Monsey, NY owned by the Debtor.  The Lease contains an
option to purchase the Property.

On March 18, 2015, the Congregation commenced an adversary
proceeding against the Yeshiva for purported unpaid rent under the
Lease, and to seek to compel the Yeshiva to vacate the Property.

Pursuant to an order entered by the Court on Sept. 11, 2015, the
stay was modified and the parties were directed to submit to the
Bais Din of Rabbi Goldmunzer to adjudicate their disputes arising
under the Lease.

Following 12 days of trial, which included multiple witnesses and
volumes of written materials and evidence, the Rabbinical Court
issued its Ruling.

As reflected in the Rabbinical Court Ruling dated Dec. 1, 2015,
while the Debtor is not required to sell the Property to the
Yeshiva, the Yeshiva is entitled to compensation, including the use
of the Property, rent free, until Aug. 31, 2017.  

The Ruling further provides that the Debtor has no right to evict
the Yeshiva, under any circumstances, until Aug. 31, 2016; and that
if the Debtor does evict the Debtor after August 2016, the Debtor
will compensate the Yeshiva $20,000 for each month they precede to
evict the Yeshiva from the Property prior to Aug. 31, 2017.  Should
the Yeshiva decide to vacate the Property prior to Aug. 31, 2017,
the Debtor is required to compensate the Yeshiva $20,000 for each
month they precede to vacate prior to Aug. 31, 2017.

The Rabbinical Court further ruled that the Debtor will provide the
Yeshiva $36,000 at the time the Yeshiva vacates the Property. The
Ruling also provides that the parties are to jointly pay the
building's utilities and insurance.

Additionally, under the Ruling, each party has the right to use the
lot, and to lease to others up to 50% of the lot, provided it does
not interfere with the other party's usage of its portion of the
lot.

Finally, the Rabbinical Court ruled that its ruling is valid even
if the Debtor were to transfer the Property to some other owner
within the aforementioned time.

By motion dated Dec. 16, 2015, the Debtor seeks to confirm only
that portion of the Rabbinical Court Ruling favorable to it -- that
the Debtor is not required to sell the Yeshiva the Property -- but
ignores all other portions of the Ruling, including those favorable
to the Yeshiva.  Accordingly, the Yeshiva has objected to the
Debtor's motion and has crossed-moved to confirm the Rabbinical
Court's entire Ruling.

The Plan provides for the sale of the Debtor's properties,
including the Property.  While the Yeshiva has no objection to the
proposed sale of the Property, it does object to the Plan to the
extent that it permits or provides for the interference with or
extinguishment of the Yeshiva's rights and remedies with respect to
the Property, including, without limitation, its continued
possession of the Property through and including Aug. 31, 2017.

Section II.F.2 of the Plan sets forth the sale procedures to be
implemented by TD Bank, N.A., for the sale of the Debtor's
properties.  Section II.F.2.11 of the Plan provides that "[a]ll
Sale Orders shall also provide that the sale of the Tier One
Properties are being approved free and clear of all liens, claims
and encumbrances, including (without limitation) any Unexpired
Leases or property rights of tenants or licensees under Section 365
of the Bankruptcy Code, if any."

The Yeshiva objects to the Plan, and specifically to Section
II.F.2.11 of the Plan, to the extent it provides for the sale of
the Property free and clear of the Yeshiva's rights and remedies
granted to it under the Rabbinical Court Ruling, including, without
limitation, its right to use the Property, rent free, through
August 31, 2017.

Mr. Lewis asserts that the Plan is inconsistent with, and would
cause TD Bank, N.A. to violate the Rabbinical Court Ruling with
respect to the Property. Thus, according to Mr. Lewis, the Plan
should be amended to provide that any sale of the Property will be
subject to all of the Yeshiva's rights and remedies granted to it
under the Rabbinical Court's Ruling, including, without limitation,
its right to the continued use the Property, rent free, through
Aug. 31, 2017.  He adds that the Plan should also be amended to
provide that the Yeshiva shall be entitled to any monetary awards
granted to it under the Rabbinical Court Ruling.

In addition, Mr. Lewis argues that Section II.F.2.11 is also
unenforceable under Section 365(h) of the Bankruptcy Code.   The
Yeshiva was granted a leasehold interest in the Property through
August 31, 2017.  Thus, notwithstanding any purported rejection of
the Yeshiva's leasehold interest pursuant to the Plan, the Yeshiva
is nonetheless entitled to the continued possession of the property
through August 31, 2017 under section 363(h).

According to Mr. Lewis, even if section 363(h) is not implicated,
the Yeshiva is still entitled to retain its appurtenant rights with
respect to the Property under sections 363(f) and 363(e).  The
Yeshiva has operated continuously for the past 18 years, and is
entering its fourth year at the Property.  The Yeshiva has a
student body of 110 students, 80 of whom are full-time, around the
clock, live-in residents.   They live in the Yeshiva dormitories
and share all meals together. Teaching occurs from early morning
prayers to evening instruction and prayers.

Both during and after the extensive Bais Din proceedings, the
Yeshiva made inquiries into available properties through Blue Sky
Realty Group LLC (in Monsey) and through one of its own benefactors
and involved parents, Michael Tauber, who is a well-known real
estate developer in the Community.  Despite its efforts, the
Yeshiva could not locate other property which would accommodate the
needs of its students who both live and learn at this facility.
The Property thus remains vital to the mission, operations and
objectives of Yeshiva Ohr Torah.

Thus, the only adequate protection that can be provided to the
Yeshiva is the continued possession of the Property through
Aug. 31, 2017, Mr. Lewis tells the Court.

The Yeshiva requests that the Plan be amended and that any order
confirming the Plan preserves Yeshiva's rights and remedies with
respect to the Property as provided in the Rabbinical Court's
Ruling, and that the Court grant the Yeshiva such other and further
relief as is just.

Attorneys for Yeshiva Ohr Torah:

         LEWIS LAW PLLC
         Kenneth M. Lewis
         220 White Plains Road
         Tarrytown, NY 10591
         Tel: (914) 761-8400
         E-mail: klewis@lewispllc.com

                - and -

         CATANIA, MAHON, MILLIGRAM & RIDER, PLLC
         Richard M. Mahon, II
         1 Corwin Court
         P.O. Box 1479
         Newburgh, NY 12550
         Tel: (845) 565-1100
         E-mail: mahon@cmmrlegal.com

                          TD Bank's Plan

TD Bank's proposed Chapter 11 plan for Congregation Birchos Yosef
provides for the swift sale of the Debtor's real property, and the
use of those sale proceeds and other proceeds to pay creditors in
full.

TD Bank is the largest secured creditor holding a secured claim in
excess of $9.2 million.

According to the Amended Disclosure Statement, the Plan provides
that:

   -- The secured claim of TD Bank (Class 1), in the amount of not
less than $9.22 million plus postpetition interest at 9% per annum,
will be paid from the net proceeds of the sale of the mortgage
properties.  To the extent that the net proceeds are less than the
amount of the TD secured claim, the deficiency portion will be
treated as an allowed unsecured claim.

   -- The secured claim of the Internal Revenue Service (Class 2),
in the amount of $255,000 as of the Petition Date, will be paid
from the proceeds of the sale of the properties covered by IRS'
liens.

   -- Mechanic's lien claims (Class 3), if allowed, will be paid
from the net proceeds from the sale of the 201 Route 306 property
after satisfying the closing costs, the real property tax claims,
and the TD secured claim.

   -- As to the secured claim of TCRF Equipment Finance (Class 4),
TCF will repossess the vehicles to satisfy the secured claim, with
any deficiency portion to be treated as an allowed unsecured
claim.

   -- General unsecured claims (Class 5), estimated at $1 million
plus any deficiency claims will be paid in full from the available
cash or the litigation proceeds.

   -- There are no holders of equity interests (Class 6) as the
Debtor is a non-profit organization.  All property of the estate
that remains after the final distribution date will become property
of the Debtor, as reorganized.

A copy of the Second Amended Disclosure Statement dated Dec. 4,
2015, is available for free at:

   http://bankrupt.com/misc/Cong_Birchos_191_2nd_Am_DS.pdf

                 About Congregation Birchos Yosef

Congregation Birchos Yosef is a religious corporation which was
formed on Jan. 16, 1985 for the purposes of creating and
maintaining a "House of Worship" in accordance with the traditions
of the Hebrew faith and to serve and advance the affairs of the
surrounding community under the leadership of the Grand Rebbe of
Nikolsburg.  Its principal office is located at 201 Route 306,
Monsey, New York.  It has real properties located in Spring Valley
and Monsey, New York.

Congregation Birchos Yosef sought bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 15-22254) in White Plains, New York, on Feb. 26,
2015.  Breindy Lebovits, the vice-president, signed the petition.

The Debtor estimated assets and debt of $10 million to $50
million.

On May 4, 2015, the Debtor won approval to hire (i) Pick & Zabicki
LLP as its counsel, (ii) Frances M. Caruso as its bookkeeper and
(iii) Montalbano, Condon & Frank, P.C. as special counsel for real
property tax-related matters.  On May 18, the Court authorized the
Debtor's retention of Levine & Associates, PC as special litigation
counsel.  On Sept. 11, 2015, the Court approved the retention of
The Law Offices of David Carlebach, Esq. as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel.  On Nov. 11, 2015, the Debtor filed
a stipulation of substitution of counsel, reflecting that The Law
Offices of Allen A. Kolber, Esq. will serve as the Debtor's
substituted bankruptcy counsel

                           *     *     *

The Debtor's "exclusivity period" under Section 1121 of the
Bankruptcy Code expired June 26, 2015.

On Aug. 24, 2015, the Court entered a memorandum of decision in
support of its order granting the Debtor's motion to enforce the
automatic stay against Bais Chinuch L'Bonois, Inc. and certain
individuals.  This order is being appealed.

TD Bank, N.A., scheduled a Jan. 6, 2016 hearing to seek
confirmation of its proposed Chapter 11 plan for the Debtor.


DECISIONPOINT SYSTEMS: Losses, Deficit Cast Going Concern Doubt
---------------------------------------------------------------
DecisionPoint Systems, Inc.'s history of losses, working capital
deficit, capital deficit, minimal liquidity and other factors raise
substantial doubt about the company's ability to continue as a
going concern, according to Greg A. Henry, chief executive officer,
and Michael P. Roe, chief financial officer of the company in a
regulatory filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
on November 13, 2015.

Messrs. Henry and Roe related: "In order for the company to
continue operations beyond the next twelve months and be able to
discharge its liabilities and commitments in the normal course of
business, the company must do some or all of the following:
establish sustained positive operating results through increased
sales, avoid further unforeseen expenses, improve liquidity and
working capital, and potentially raise additional equity or debt
capital.  There can be no assurance that the company will be able
to achieve sustainable positive operating results or obtain
additional funds when needed or that such funds, if available, will
be obtainable on terms satisfactory to management.

"In the quarter ended September 30, 2015, the company experienced a
decrease in revenue from continuing operations of $3.4 million, or
29.3% compared to the quarter ended September 30, 2014, and a $10.4
million, or 27.5% decrease in revenue for the nine months ended
September 30, 2015 compared to the nine months ended September 30,
2014.  In the quarter ended September 30, 2015, the company
experienced an operating loss from continuing operations of $52,000
compared to the operating loss from continuing operations of
$16,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, and excluding the
impact of a goodwill and intangible asset impairment charge of
$3.047 million, a $598,000 operating loss from continuing
operations for the nine months September 30, 2015, compared to an
operating loss from continuing operations of $161,000 for the
comparable period in 2014.  At September 30, 2015 and December 31,
2014, the company had a substantial working capital deficit,
excluding discontinued operations and classified assets and
liabilities held for sale, totaling $10.3 million and $7.8 million,
respectively.  Although a portion of this deficit is associated
with deferred costs and unearned revenues, the liabilities of the
company that are expected to be satisfied in the foreseeable future
in cash far exceed our receivables and other assets that are
expected to be satisfied in cash.  In addition, as a consequence of
our recent historical results of operations, availability under our
credit line with Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) has contracted and our
overall liquidity has become further constrained.  The company is
dependent upon future growth in net sales to meet our liquidity
needs and our debt covenants for the next twelve months.

"The company is currently in default on certain obligations as of
September 30, 2015.  The company has not made the final payment on
the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) Term Loan that was originally
scheduled to be paid in June 2015.  The payment had been
rescheduled with RBC for September 2015, and continues to be
negotiated with RBC.  Such rescheduling has not been documented in
writing and is based on an oral agreement with RBC.  The company
also has not paid interest due on the BDC, Inc. (BDC) Term Loan due
since June 2015.  BDC advised the company on July 30, 2015 that the
financing is in arrears on interest.  The failure to pay interest
due is a violation of the terms of the financing agreement.  The
company is in negotiations to secure acceptable refinancing terms.

"The company is currently in default on the Apex Systems
Integrators, Inc. (Apex) seller note as of the date of this filing.
The seller of Apex has demanded payment in full including certain
monitoring and administrative fees.  The company has accrued
$69,000 as of September 30, 2015 for certain fees related to the
demand payment.  Between April 2015 and September 2015, Apex had
been delinquent on its Canadian premises lease obligations to
Harvester Properties of Burlington, Inc.  In June 2015, Harvester
Properties gave notice of termination of the lease agreement. Since
that time, Apex has relocated its operations.  At September 30,
2015, there was $125,000 relating to these lease obligations
including interest and other fees included in account payable and
accrued expenses on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance
sheets.

"Due to the failure to pay interest on the BDC term loan discussed,
the company is in covenant default under the subordinated debt
provisions of the applicable SVB loan agreement (the SVB Loan
Agreement).  The company has had discussions with SVB regarding
this default and is working with SVB to cure.  A SVB lending
officer has orally indicated that SVB does not intend exercising
legal rights under the SVB Loan Agreement for this default,
however, this is not evidenced in writing and is not enforceable.

"In the event either or both of the RBC Loan Agreement or the BDC
Loan Agreement are deemed to be in default, RBC or BDC, as
applicable, could, among other things (subject to the rights of SVB
as the company's senior lender and the terms of the inter-creditor
agreement between SVB and BDC), terminate the facilities, demand
immediate payment of any outstanding amounts, and foreclose on our
assets.  Any such action would require us to curtail or cease
operations, as the company does not currently have alternative
sources of financing.

"If the company does not achieve sustained positive operating
results and does not raise sufficient additional capital, material
adverse events may occur including, but not limited to, (1) a
reduction in the nature and scope of the company's operations, (2)
the company's inability to fully implement its current business
plan and (3) as discussed, enforcement actions taken under the
Company's various loan agreements.  If such events were to occur,
they would have material adverse effects on the company.  There can
be no assurance that the company will successfully improve its
liquidity position."

At September 30, 2015, the company had total assets of $14,104,000,
total liabilities of $19,600,000, and total stockholders' deficit
of $5,496,000.

The company posted a net income of $229,000 for the three months
ended September 30, 2015, compared to a net loss of $563,000 for
the three months ended September 30, 2014.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/zwrsxhb

DecisionPoint Systems, Inc. aims to empower mobile workers - those
individuals who are on the front line in direct contact with
customers - through the implementation of mobile technologies,
including specialized mobile business applications, wireless
networks, mobile computers and related services.  The company
maintains its headquarters in Irvine, California.



DETROIT, MI: Governor Pitches Pricey Plan to Fix City Schools
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reported that Detroit needs more than a
revitalized downtown with new office workers to spur its rebirth
following the largest public bankruptcy in U.S. history.  It needs
to upgrade a public school system that's considered the worst of
its size in the nation, the AP further reported.

According to AP, Michigan's Republican governor, Rick Snyder, is
proposing another pricey state bailout and a sweeping
reorganization that could lead to closing independent, publicly
funded charter schools, where an increasing number of city students
are enrolled.  The posture is at odds with his party's unflinching
commitment to the school-choice movement, and the plan's
implementation will require convincing bailout-fatigued lawmakers
to send $715 million more to Detroit, the report added.

                     About the City of Detroit

The City of Detroit, Michigan, weighed down by more than $18
billion in accrued obligations, sought municipal bankruptcy
protection on July 18, 2013, by filing a voluntary Chapter 9
petition (Bankr. E.D. Mich. Case No. 13-53846).  Detroit estimated
more than $1 billion in both assets and debts.

Kevyn Orr, who was appointed in March 2013 as Detroit's emergency
manager, signed the petition.  Detroit is represented by lawyers
at Jones Day and Miller Canfield Paddock and Stone PLC.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder authorized the bankruptcy filing.

The filing makes Detroit the largest American city to seek
bankruptcy, in terms of population and the size of the debts and
liabilities involved.

The City's $18 billion in debt includes $5.85 billion in special
revenue obligations, $6.4 billion in post-employment benefits,
$3.5 billion for underfunded pensions, $1.13 billion on secured
and unsecured general obligations, and $1.43 billion on pension-
related debt, according to a court filing.  Debt service consumes
42.5 percent of revenue.  The city has 100,000 creditors and
20,000 retirees.

Detroit is represented by David G. Heiman, Esq., and Heather
Lennox, Esq., at Jones Day, in Cleveland, Ohio; Bruce Bennett,
Esq., at Jones Day, in Los Angeles, California; and Jonathan S.
Green, Esq., and Stephen S. LaPlante, Esq., at Miller Canfield
Paddock and Stone PLC, in Detroit, Michigan.

Sharon Levine, Esq., at Lowenstein Sandler LLP, is representing
the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
and the International Union.

Babette Ceccotti, Esq., at Cohen, Weiss & Simon LLP, is
representing the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America.

A nine-member official committee of retired workers appointed in
the case is represented by Dentons US LLP.  Lazard Freres & Co.
LLC serves as the Retiree Committee's financial advisor.

Detroit filed a notice that the effective date of its
bankruptcy-exit plan occurred on Dec. 10, 2014.  Judge Steven
Rhodes on Nov. 12, 2014, entered an order confirming the Eighth
Amended Plan for the Adjustment of Debts of the City of Detroit.

Thomas Tucker, a federal bankruptcy judge since 2003, took over
Detroit's landmark bankruptcy case following the retirement of
Judge Rhodes.


ENCLAVE AT BOYNTON: Files Rule 2015.3 Periodic Report
-----------------------------------------------------
Enclave at Boynton Waters Properties LLC filed a report with the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida,
disclosing that it does not hold a substantial or controlling
interest in any company.

The company filed the report pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2015.3.
The report dated Oct. 26, 2015, is available for free at:

                       http://is.gd/o4bEyT

                 About Enclave at Boynton Waters

Enclave at Boynton Waters Properties, LLC, et al., filed Chapter 11
bankruptcy petitions (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Case Nos. 15-26141,
15-26143,
15-26148, 15-26152, 15-26155, 15-26156, 15-26162 and 15-26165) on
Sept. 8, 2015.  The petitions were signed by John B. Kennelly as
manager.  Erik P. Kimball is assigned to the first-filed case
(15-26141).

The Debtors own various parcels of real property that constitute
the collateral of the same secured lender, BI Boca Boynton
Portfolio, LLC.


ENERGY FUTURE: 2016 Compensation Programs Approved
--------------------------------------------------
Energy Future Holdings Corp. has won court approval of its 2016
compensation programs.

The compensation programs, according to court documents, "will
encourage and reward exceptional performance by all employees" and
certain retention bonus programs for non-insiders.

The Debtors' senior employees are eligible to earn market-based
bonuses if -- and only if -- the Debtors meet challenging financial
and operational targets that will generate substantial value for
the Debtors and all of their stakeholders.

The Cost of Insider Executive Annual Incentive Plan is
$8.0 million at target, payable February/March 2016, while the cost
of the 2015 annual incentive Plan is $56.1 million.

                        About Energy Future

Energy Future Holdings Corp., formerly known as TXU Corp., is a
privately held diversified energy holding company with a Portfolio
of competitive and regulated energy businesses in Texas.

Oncor, an 80 percent-owned entity within the EFH group, is the
largest regulated transmission and distribution utility in Texas.

The Company delivers electricity to roughly three million delivery
points in and around Dallas-Fort Worth.  EFH Corp. was created in
October 2007 in a $45 billion leverage buyout of Texas power
company TXU in a deal led by private-equity companies Kohlberg
Kravis Roberts & Co. and TPG Inc.

On April 29, 2014, Energy Future Holdings and 70 affiliated
companies sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr. D. Del.
Lead Case No. 14-10979) after reaching a deal with some key
financial stakeholders to keep its businesses operating while
reducing its roughly $40 billion in debt.

The Debtors' cases have been assigned to Judge Christopher S.
Sontchi (CSS).  The Debtors are seeking to have their cases Jointly
administered for procedural purposes.

As of Dec. 31, 2013, EFH Corp. reported assets of $36.4 billion in
book value and liabilities of $49.7 billion.  The Debtors have $42
billion of funded indebtedness.

EFH's legal advisor for the Chapter 11 proceedings is Kirkland &
Ellis LLP, its financial advisor is Evercore Partners and its
restructuring advisor is Alvarez & Marsal.  The TCEH first lien
lenders supporting the restructuring agreement are represented by
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, LLP as legal advisor, and
Millstein & Co., LLC, as financial advisor.

The EFIH unsecured creditors supporting the restructuring
Agreement are represented by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, as
legal advisor, and Centerview Partners, as financial advisor.  The
EFH equity holders supporting the restructuring agreement are
represented by Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, as legal advisor,
and Blackstone Advisory Partners LP, as financial advisor.  Epiq
Systems is the claims agent.

Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, the successor trustee for the
second-lien noteholders owed about $1.6 billion, is represented by
Ashby & Geddes, P.A.'s William P. Bowden, Esq., and Gregory A.
Taylor, Esq., and Brown Rudnick LLP's Edward S. Weisfelner, Esq.,
Jeffrey L. Jonas, Esq., Andrew P. Strehle, Esq., Jeremy B. Coffey,
Esq., and Howard L. Siegel, Esq.

An Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has been appointed in
the case.  The Committee represents the interests of the unsecured
creditors of ONLY of Energy Future Competitive Holdings Company
LLC; EFCH's direct subsidiary, Texas Competitive Electric Holdings
Company LLC; and EFH Corporate Services Company, and of no other
debtors.  The Committee has selected Morrison & Foerster LLP and
Polsinelli PC for representation in this high-profile energy
restructuring.  The lawyers working on the case are James M. Peck,
Esq., Brett H. Miller, Esq., and Lorenzo Marinuzzi, Esq., at
Morrison & Foerster LLP; and Christopher A. Ward, Esq., Justin K.
Edelson, Esq., Shanti M. Katona, Esq., and Edward Fox, Esq., at
Polsinelli PC.


EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES: Investors Get Add'l Class Cert. in Enviro Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kali Hays at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that a California federal
judge has certified an additional class of investors accusing
bankrupt automotive and industrial battery maker Exide
Technologies' executives of covering up the company's failure to
comply with environmental regulations, finding claims concerning
the company's control over the executives are common among class
members.

U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson on Dec. 17, 2015, certified a
class of noteholders pursuing Securities Exchange Act of 1934
violations against Exide.

                      About Exide Technologies

Headquartered in Milton, Ga., Exide Technologies (NASDAQ: XIDE)
-- http://www.exide.com/-- manufactures and   distributes lead    
acid batteries and other related electrical energy storage
products.

Exide first sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. Del. Case No.
02-11125) on April 14, 2002, and exited bankruptcy two years
after.

Matthew N. Kleiman, Esq., and Kirk A. Kennedy, Esq., at Kirkland &
Ellis, and James E. O'Neill, Esq., at Pachulski Stang Ziehl &
Jones LLP represented the Debtors in their successful
restructuring.

Exide returned to Chapter 11 bankruptcy (Bankr. D. Del. Case No.
13-11482) on June 10, 2013.  Exide disclosed $1.89 billion in
assets and $1.14 billion in liabilities as of March 31, 2013.

Exide's international operations were not included in the filing
and will continue their business operations without supervision
from the U.S. courts.

For the new case, Exide has tapped Anthony W. Clark, Esq., at
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, and Pachulski Stang
Ziehl & Jones LLP as counsel; Alvarez & Marsal as financial
advisor; Sitrick and Company Inc. as public relations consultant
and GCG as claims agent.  Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP was
tapped as special counsel.

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors is represented by
Lowenstein Sandler LLP and Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP as
co-counsel.  Zolfo Cooper, LLC serves as its bankruptcy
consultants and financial advisors.  Geosyntec Consultants was
tapped as environmental consultants to the Committee.

Robert J. Keach of the law firm Bernstein Shur as fee examiner has
been appointed as fee examiner.  He has hired his own firm as
counsel.

Exide said its Plan of Reorganization became effective on April
30, 2015, and that the Company has emerged from Chapter 11 as a
newly reorganized company.  The Bankruptcy Court for the District
of Delaware confirmed the Plan on March 27, 2015.


FILMED ENTERTAINMENT: Opposes Committee Bid for Ch. 7 Conversion
----------------------------------------------------------------
Filmed Entertainment, Inc., is opposing a motion filed by the
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors for conversion of the
bankruptcy case to a Chapter 7 liquidation and for standing to
prosecute causes of action on behalf of the Debtor's estate.

Unable to challenge the propriety of the sale of the Debtor's
assets to Edge Line Ventures LLC, the Committee is trying a
different strategy -- diversion in the form of a request to convert
the Chapter 11 case to a case under chapter 7 or, coincidentally,
derivative standing to prosecute claims that are contemplated for
release under the sale agreement, releases that are a key component
of the transaction.

Scott A. Griffin, Esq., at Griffin Hamersky P.C., argues that the
Committee has failed to establish "cause" exists to convert the
Chapter 11 Case pursuant to Section 1112(b) of the Bankruptcy
Code.

"Here, there is a very real prospect of a successful
rehabilitation.  The Debtor has a firm offer from a committed buyer
willing to acquire substantially all of its assets on terms, and
for consideration, that would result in recoveries to unsecured
creditors, with such consideration providing the vehicle for the
Debtor to confirm a liquidating plan shortly after the Sale
closing," Mr. Griffin tells the Court.

Pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement dated as of Nov. 16, 2015
(the "Modified Purchase Agreement"), the Debtor has agreed to sell
substantially all assets to Edge Line on these terms:

   (i) A cash purchase price of $425,000 (a $200,000 increase of
the cash consideration initially proposed by Buyer);

  (ii) Seller shall assume and assign the Madison Avenue Lease to
the Buyer, who agrees to turn over the Designated Sublease Profits
for the benefit of the Debtor's creditors in an amount not to
exceed $684,061;

(iii) Buyer agrees to assume $475,000 in administrative expense
payments due to the Debtor's affiliates, Bookspan and TAW;

  (iv) Buyer agrees to satisfy all additional unpaid and unaccrued
postpetition administrative expenses (except for amounts alleged to
be payable to the Debtor studio vendors), which are estimated to
be, but not limited to, $55,000;

   (v) Buyer agrees to fund certain additional Wind-Down Costs in
the amount of $116,250;

  (vi) Buyer will agree to cure monetary defaults under the Assumed
Contracts up to the aggregate amount of $78,098 (the "Cure
Amounts"), which will reduce the aggregate amount of general
unsecured claims by a corresponding amount;

(vii) Buyer and Seller agree to a mutual release of all claims
against each other and each of its affiliates including, but not
limited to: (i) the Seller's release of any Avoidance Actions
against Bookspan, TAW, Books Acquisition LLC, Incredible Warehouse
Holding Company LLC, DVD Direct Acquisition LLC, and Pride Tree
Holdings, Inc., and each of its officers and directors (the
"Released Claims"); and (ii) the Buyer's waiver of any and all
Claims in the Chapter 11 Case, including, but not limited to, the
following Claims, which will be disallowed and expunged from
Schedule F of the Debtor's Schedule of Assets and Liabilities: (a)
Claim Number 165090 in the amount of $1,214,181 in favor of
Bookspan; and (b) Claim Number 165128 in the amount of $21,939 in
favor of TAW; and

(viii) Other Avoidance Actions, including, but not limited to,
those against Bertelsmann Inc., Blackstone Group, JMCK Corp.,
Najafi Companies, Sony Corporation or Warner Bros. Entertainment
Inc. are excluded from the Acquired Assets and are expressly
preserved for the estate (the "Retained Claims").

As to the Committee's request for standing to pursue actions, the
Debtor tells the Court that it conducted an analysis of the
Released Claims to determine the likelihood of success in
connection with any litigation to obtain recoveries in connection
with those claims.

The Committee specifically identifies approximately $36,740,000 in
transfers that it seeks authority to recover as preferential
payments and fraudulent transfers pursuant to adversary proceedings
that it would initiate.

However, the Debtor notes that of the not less than $36,740,000 in
transfers the Committee believes is recoverable on preferential
and/or fraudulent transfer grounds, only $856,662 of transfers that
were made to affiliated entities -- Bookspan, LLC ($647,479) and
Totally Awesome Warehouse, LLC ($209,184) -- are covered by the
Released Claims.  According to the Debtor, its professionals have
analyzed these payments, and the underlying invoices satisfied by
each, and compared those payments to payments made to each for
similar services in the year prior to the Preference Period.  As a
result, the Debtor believes these payments are subject to defense
from recovery as preferences.

"Significantly, under the Modified Purchase Agreement, the Debtor's
has expressly preserved the Retained Claims for the estate.  By the
Committee's own admission, at least approximately $35,868,000 in
Retained Claims will be left behind for the benefit of the estate's
creditors, and potentially more given the breadth of the Retained
Claims.  In fact, the entirety of the $35,868,000 in transfers
highlighted in the Conversion Motion implicate JMCK Corp., Najafi
Companies, or Bertelsmann Inc., each of whom is specifically
identified in the Modified Purchase Agreement as a party to which
Retained Claims may be brought against.  Accordingly, the Debtor's
decision to release $856,662 in Released Claims where the prospect
of recovery was determined to be very low, and preserve $35,868,000
in Retained Claims, is wholly justifiable," Mr. Griffin tells the
Court.

Counsel for the Debtor:

          GRIFFIN HAMERSKY P.C.
          Scott A. Griffin, Esq.
          Michael D. Hamersky, Esq.
          485 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 710-0338
          Facsimile: (212) 710-0339

                    About Filmed Entertainment

Filmed Entertainment Inc. owns and operates the "Columbia House DVD
Club," a direct-to-customer distributor of movies and television
series in the United States.  FEI conducts its business through
physical catalogues and through the --
http://www.columbiahouse.com/Web site.  FEI was historically
active in the musical compact disc business, but exited the music
business in 2010.  Founded in 1955 as a division of CBS Inc. to
sell vinyl records and cassette tapes, FEI is a unit of Pride Tree
Holdings, Inc., which acquired FEI in December 2012.

On Aug. 10, 2015 FEI filed a voluntary petition for relief under
Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
Case No. 15-12244) in Manhattan, New York.  The case is pending
before the Honorable Shelley C. Chapman.

The Debtor tapped Griffin Hamersky P.C. as counsel and Prime Clerk
LLC as claims and noticing agent.

The Debtor estimated assets of $1 million to $10 million and debt
of $50 million to $100 million.

The U.S. Trustee for Region 2 appointed five creditors of Filmed
Entertainment to serve on the official committee of unsecured
creditors.


FRESH & EASY: To Sell More Stores to CVS for $5.5-Mil.
------------------------------------------------------
Lillian Rizzo, writing for Dow Jones' Daily Bankruptcy Review,
reported that West Coast grocery chain Fresh & Easy LLC is looking
for approval to sell more of its locations to CVS Pharmacy Inc. for
$5.5 million.

According to the report, the liquidating grocery chain filed papers
asking the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del., to authorize
the sale of five store leases in California without the auction
process that is typically required in bankruptcy in light of what
it says is the "strength" of CVS 's offer and the "uncertainty"
associated with conducting a formal auction.

                       About Fresh & Easy

Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market Inc., and its affiliate filed
Chapter 11 petitions (Bankr. D. Del. Case Nos. 13-12569 and
13-12570) on Sept. 30, 2013.  The petitions were signed by James
Dibbo, chief financial officer.  Judge Kevin J. Carey presides
over the case.

Fresh & Easy owes $738 million to Cheshunt, England-based Tesco,
the U.K.'s biggest retailer. Fresh & Easy never made a profit and
lost an average of $22 million a month in the 12 months ended in
February, according to court papers.

Jones Day serves as lead bankruptcy counsel.  Richards, Layton &
Finger, P.A., serves as local Delaware counsel.  Alvarez & Marsal
North America, LLC, serves as financial advisors, and Alvarez &
Marsal Securities, LLC, serves as investment banker.  Prime Clerk
LLC acts as the Debtors' claims and noticing agent.  Gordon
Brothers Group, LLC, and Tiger Capital Group, LLC, serves as the
Debtors' consultant. The Debtors estimated assets of at least $100
million and liabilities of at least $500 million.

Roberta A. DeAngelis, U.S. Trustee for Region 3, appointed five
creditors to serve in the Official Committee of Unsecured
Creditors in the Chapter 11 cases of Fresh & Easy Neighborhood
Market Inc., et al.  Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP serves as
counsel to the Committee. FTI Consulting, Inc. serves as its
financial advisor.

The Debtors closed, on or about Nov. 26, 2013, the sale of about
150 supermarkets plus a production facility in Riverside,
California, to Ron Buckle's Yucaipa Cos.  Pursuant to the sale
terms, the bankruptcy company changed its name, and the name of
the case, to Old FENM Inc.

Judge Kevin J. Carey of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District
of Delaware on July 2, 2014, issued an order confirming Old FENM,
Inc., et al.'s second amended joint Chapter 11 plan of
reorganization.


GARLOCK SEALING: Can't Achieve Cramdown, Says Asbestos Committee
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants in the
Chapter 11 cases of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al., says
that as the current asbestos claimants in Class 4 have resoundingly
rejected the Debtors' Second Amended Plan of Reorganization, the
Plan cannot be confirmed because it fails to meet the cramdown
requirements under Sec. 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.

"The votes are in.  After months of solicitation, the current
asbestos claimants in Class 4 have resoundingly rejected the Plan.
According to the Balloting Agent's published tally, more than 99%
in number of Class 4 claimants and more than 96% in value have
voted against the Plan. It could not be clearer that members of
Class 4 are profoundly dissatisfied with the Plan," the Committee
tells the Court.

"While the Debtors feign puzzlement as to the outcome of the vote
(and strive to undo it), the voting tally should surprise no one
given the unfair and coercive treatment that the Plan would visit
upon asbestos victims if it were confirmed.  The Plan would cap for
all time the Debtors' financial responsibility for their asbestos
torts, channel all asbestos personal injury and wrongful death
claims to a Settlement Facility or a Litigation Fund, both of which
would have capped funding, extinguish all derivative asbestos
claims against Affiliates, and leave the parent company with a
valuable equity interest -- all without purporting to comply with
Sec. 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, the statute Congress designed
especially to govern asbestos-driven reorganizations like this one.
Taken as a whole, the Plan represents a radical and unprecedented
effort by longtime asbestos defendants to trump the tort system
through bankruptcy and cap their tort liability, while the Debtors'
ultimate parent, EnPro, would retain an equity interest worth
hundreds of millions of dollars."

According to the Committee, although the Debtors' Plan would
disregard the votes of asbestos claimants on the pretense that they
are unimpaired, the asbestos claims are obviously and profoundly
impaired by the Plan.  Thus, in the wake of Class 4's rejection of
the Plan and the Debtors' refusal to abide by the requirements of
Sec. 524(g), the Debtors seek to cram down their Plan over the
Committee's objections.

But, the Committee asserts, the Debtors' efforts to achieve
cramdown should fail for several reasons:

  * The Debtors cannot cram down their plan over the rejecting
votes of Class 4 Claimants because no other impaired class of
claims has accepted their plan.  To achieve a cramdown, the
Bankruptcy Code requires that there be an impaired class of
non-insider claims that has accepted the plan.  The Debtors have
sought to satisfy this requirement by inviting the FCR to vote on
behalf of all future claimants as a class (Class 5) and positioning
themselves to argue that his acceptance creates an impaired
accepting class.  The maneuver, however, fails because, as the
Committee has explained elsewhere, the FCR has no legal authority
or capacity to cast a ballot on behalf of future claimants.

  * Even if there is an impaired accepting class, the Debtors
cannot satisfy the cramdown requirements under Sec. 1129(b).
Cramdown is available only if "the plan does not discriminate
unfairly, and is fair and equitable, with respect to each class of
claims . . . that is impaired under, and has not accepted, the
plan." 11 U.S.C. Sec. 1129(b)(1).  The Plan unfairly discriminates
against Class 4 by subjecting current asbestos claimants to a
claims bar date, while Class 5 Future Asbestos Claimants would face
no similar hurdle to receive a distribution.  

  * In addition to preventing unfair discrimination, Sec. 1129(b)
requires that the proposed plan be "fair and equitable" to the
dissenting class.  The Plan violates the absolute priority rule, in
that it would coerce claimants to accept artificially depressed
settlements for their claims, while equity would retain millions of
dollars of value.  In addition, the Plan is not fair and equitable
because it would shift the risk of Plan failure to asbestos
claimants, while EnPro would retain its equity interest.

Co-Counsel for the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury
Claimants:

         CAPLIN & DRYSDALE, CHARTERED
         Trevor W. Swett III, Esq.
         Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq.
         Jeffrey A. Liesemer, Esq.
         One Thomas Circle, N.W.
         Washington, D.C. 20005
         Telephone: (202) 862-5000
         E-mail: tswett@capdale.com
                 lkelleher@capdale.com
                 jliesemer@capdale.com

                  - and -

         Elihu Inselbuch, Esq.
         600 Lexington Avenue, 21st Floor
         New York, NY 10022
         Telephone: (212) 379-6000
         E-mail: einselbuch@capdale.com

                  - and -

         MOON WRIGHT & HOUSTON, PLLC
         Travis W. Moon, Esq.
         Richard S. Wright, Esq.
         227 West Trade Street, Suite 1800
         Charlotte, NC 28202
         Telephone: (704) 944-6560
         E-mail: tmoon@mwhattorneys.com
                 rwright@mwhattorneys.com

                       About Garlock Sealing

Headquartered in Palmyra, New York, Garlock Sealing Technologies
LLC is a unit of EnPro Industries, Inc. (NYSE: NPO).  For more than
a century, Garlock has been helping customers efficiently seal the
toughest process fluids in the most demanding applications.

On June 5, 2010, Garlock filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition
(Bankr. W.D.N.C. Case No. 10-31607) in Charlotte, North Carolina,
to establish a trust to resolve all current and future asbestos
claims against Garlock under Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code.  The Debtor estimated $500 million to $1 billion in assets
and up to $500 million in debts as of the Petition Date.

Affiliates The Anchor Packing Company and Garrison Litigation
Management Group, Ltd., also filed for bankruptcy.

Albert F. Durham, Esq., at Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A.,
represents the Debtor in their Chapter 11 effort.  Garland S.
Cassada, Esq., at Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, serves as counsel For
asbestos matters.

The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants in the
Chapter 11 cases is represented by Travis W. Moon, Esq., at
Hamilton Moon Stephens Steele & Martin, PLLC, in Charlotte, NC,
Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, in New
York, and Trevor W. Swett III, Esq., Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq., and
Jeanna Rickards Koski, Esq., in Washington, D.C. 20005.

Joseph W. Grier, III, the Court-appointed legal representative for
future asbestos claimants, has retained A. Cotten Wright, Esq., at
Grier Furr & Crisp, PA, and Richard H. Wyron, Esq., and Jonathan P.
Guy, Esq., at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, as his
co-counsel.

Judge George Hodges of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of North Carolina on Jan. 10, 2014, entered an order
estimating the liability for present and future mesothelioma claims
against Garlock Sealing at $125 million, consistent with the
positions GST put forth at trial.

In January 2015, the Debtors filed their Second Amended Plan of
Reorganization, which is backed by the Future Asbestos Claimants'
Representative (FCR).  The confirmation hearing is slated to begin
June 20, 2016.

Under the schedule for confirmation proceedings ordered by the
Court, objections to confirmation of the Plan that do not depend on
the results of voting were due Oct. 6, 2015, and confirmation
objections that depend on such results are due on Dec. 18, 2015.


GARLOCK SEALING: Fights With Asbestos Claimants Over Voting Power
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kali Hays at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that Garlock and a group of
future asbestos claimants have joined forces to fight a bid by
current asbestos claimants aiming for another denial of the
company's reorganization plan, arguing that the current plan does
not violate bankruptcy laws and that future claimants are entitled
to a plan vote.

The official committee of asbestos personal injury claimants urged
a Delaware bankruptcy court in November to rule that Garlock
Sealing Technologies LLC's currently proposed plan violates the
Bankruptcy Code.

                       About Garlock Sealing

Headquartered in Palmyra, New York, Garlock Sealing Technologies
LLC is a unit of EnPro Industries, Inc. (NYSE: NPO).  For more
than a century, Garlock has been helping customers efficiently seal
the toughest process fluids in the most demanding applications.

On June 5, 2010, Garlock filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition
(Bankr. W.D.N.C. Case No. 10-31607) in Charlotte, North Carolina,
to establish a trust to resolve all current and future asbestos
claims against Garlock under Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code.  The Debtor estimated $500 million to $1 billion in assets
and up to $500 million in debts as of the Petition Date.

Affiliates The Anchor Packing Company and Garrison Litigation
Management Group, Ltd., also filed for bankruptcy.

Albert F. Durham, Esq., at Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A.,
represents the Debtor in their Chapter 11 effort.  Garland S.
Cassada, Esq., at Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, serves as counsel
For asbestos matters.

The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants in
the Chapter 11 cases is represented by Travis W. Moon, Esq., at
Hamilton Moon Stephens Steele & Martin, PLLC, in Charlotte, NC,
Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, in New
York, and Trevor W. Swett III, Esq., Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq., and
Jeanna Rickards Koski, Esq., in Washington, D.C. 20005.

Joseph W. Grier, III, the Court-appointed legal representative for
future asbestos claimants, has retained A. Cotten Wright, Esq., at
Grier Furr & Crisp, PA, and Richard H. Wyron, Esq., and Jonathan
P. Guy, Esq., at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, as his
co-counsel.

Judge George Hodges of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of North Carolina on Jan. 10, 2014, entered an order
estimating the liability for present and future mesothelioma
claims against Garlock Sealing at $125 million, consistent with the
positions GST put forth at trial.

In January 2015, the Debtors filed their Second Amended Plan of
Reorganization, which is backed by the Future Asbestos Claimants'
Representative (FCR).  The confirmation hearing is slated to begin
June 20, 2016.

Under the schedule for confirmation proceedings ordered by the
Court, objections to confirmation of the Plan that do not depend
on the results of voting were due Oct. 6, 2015, and confirmation
objections that depend on such results are due on Dec. 18, 2015.


GARLOCK SEALING: Insists Current Asbestos Claimants Not Impaired
----------------------------------------------------------------
Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al., note that their Second
Amended Plan of Reorganization promises to pay Class 4 current
asbestos personal injury and wrongful death claimants the full
allowed amount of their claims after jury trial in federal district
court, with applicable interest, or else (at the claimant's
election) a settlement payment determined under objective criteria.
Thus, they ask the Court to reject the motion of the Official
Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants for partial summary
judgment that Class 4 Claims are impaired.

The Debtors point out that to ensure these payments are made, the
Plan establishes a protected fund for paying Class 4 and Class 5
claims as they become allowed -- a fund that can never be used for
any purpose other than paying such claims.  Total funding amounts
to multiples of the estimated allowed amount of all current
asbestos claims in Class 4 as well as all future asbestos claims in
Class 5, and will therefore be sufficient to make
the promised payments.  Accordingly, the Plan in no sense alters
the "legal, equitable, and contractual rights" of Class 4
claimants, and Class 4 is not impaired.

Nevertheless, the Committee moves for partial summary judgment that
the Plan impairs Class 4.  In particular, the Committee maintains
that the Plan alters Class 4 claimants' rights in
two ways: (1) by not setting aside all the assets of the Debtors
for payment of disputed and unliquidated asbestos claims, and (2)
by releasing certain of Debtors' derivative claims against their
parents and affiliates, thereby precluding holders of Class 4
claims from asserting such claims.

"But "[i]mpairment results from what the plan does, not what the
[Code] does." In re Am. Solar King Corp., 90 B.R. 808, 819 (Bankr.
W.D. Tex. 1988) (emphasis in original).  The Committee fails to
recognize that all its complaints stem from the Code, not Debtors'
Plan.  The Code required this Court to estimate the allowed amount
of contingent and unliquidated asbestos claims, and Debtors have
rendered Class 4 and Class 5 unimpaired as a matter of law by
setting aside funds dedicated to those claims that exceed the
aggregate allowed amount by multiples.  Any risk that these funds
will not be sufficient is a result of Congress's decision to
require estimation of all contingent and unliquidated claims where
liquidation would unduly delay the case -- not Debtors' Plan. And
it is a vanishingly small risk, as Debtors will prove at
confirmation, most especially for the Class 4 claimants who will
come first in time. Likewise, it is the Code, not the Plan, that
vests Debtors with exclusive control over the claims resolved
through the Parent Settlement, and the rights that Class 4
claimants would have outside of bankruptcy are irrelevant to
whether the Plan impairs them within bankruptcy.  Accordingly, the
Court should deny the Committee's Motion," Garland S. Cassada,
Esq., at Robinson, Bradshaw & Hinson, P.A., argues.

                             The Plan

In July 2013, as required by Section 502(c) of the Code, the Court
held a hearing to estimate the aggregate allowed amount of
Garlock's pending and future mesothelioma claims.  The Court held
that $125 million is a "reasonable and reliable" estimate of
Garlock's liability for such claims (the "Estimation Opinion"). The
Court estimated the allowed amount of current mesothelioma claims
at $25 million and the allowed amount of future mesothelioma.

The Debtors' Second Amended Plan is the result of a full year of
negotiations between Debtors, Debtors' parent Coltec Industries
("Coltec"), and the FCR following entry of the Estimation Opinion.

The Plan treats Class 4 claims (current asbestos personal injury
claims) and Class 5 claims (future asbestos personal injury claims)
identically: both claimant classes will be able to choose between a
Litigation Option and a Settlement Option.  

Claimants who elect the Litigation Option will pursue allowance of
their claims through litigation governed by the Code and conducted
pursuant to a case management order.  Any claimant who elects the
Litigation Option will be paid in full, in cash, with any
postpetition interest to which the claimant is entitled, upon entry
of a final judgment allowing the claim.  Claimants may
alternatively elect the Settlement Option and receive a settlement
payment from a Settlement Facility, determined in accordance with
pre-established claims resolution procedures and objective
settlement criteria.

The Settlement Facility will have aggregate funding of $327.5
million, with Debtors providing $297.5 million and Coltec
contributing $30 million.  The Litigation Option will be funded
from payments litigating claimants otherwise would have received
from the Settlement Option, plus additional funds in an aggregate
amount of $30 million and up to $132 million in additional
contingent payments provided by Reorganized GST or Coltec as
needed.

Coltec would make the $30 million contribution in partial
consideration for a release by the Debtors of derivative claims
against Coltec and Debtors' other parents and affiliates (the
"Parent Settlement").  The Debtors would release, among other
claims, preferential or fraudulent transfer claims and claims
seeking to hold Debtors' parents and affiliates derivatively liable
for Class 4 and Class 5 claims, including alter ego/piercing the
corporate veil claims or successor liability claims.

                           *     *     *

Special Corporate and Litigation Counsel to the Debtors:

         Garland S. Cassada, Esq.
         Jonathan C. Krisko, Esq.
         Richard C. Worf, Jr., Esq.
         ROBINSON BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A.
         101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900
         Charlotte, NC 28246
         Telephone: (704) 377-2536
         Facsimile: (704) 378-4000
         E-mail: gcassada@rbh.com
                 jkrisko@rbh.com
                 rworf@rbh.com

Counsel to the Debtors:

         Richard Rayburn, Jr.
         Albert F. Durham
         John R. Miller, Jr.
         RAYBURN COOPER & DURHAM, P.A.
         1200 Carillion, 227 West Trade Street
         Charlotte, NC 28202
         Telephone: (704) 334-0891

                       About Garlock Sealing

Headquartered in Palmyra, New York, Garlock Sealing Technologies
LLC is a unit of EnPro Industries, Inc. (NYSE: NPO).  For more than
a century, Garlock has been helping customers efficiently seal the
toughest process fluids in the most demanding applications.

On June 5, 2010, Garlock filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition
(Bankr. W.D.N.C. Case No. 10-31607) in Charlotte, North Carolina,
to establish a trust to resolve all current and future asbestos
claims against Garlock under Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code.  The Debtor estimated $500 million to $1 billion in assets
and up to $500 million in debts as of the Petition Date.

Affiliates The Anchor Packing Company and Garrison Litigation
Management Group, Ltd., also filed for bankruptcy.

Albert F. Durham, Esq., at Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A.,
represents the Debtor in their Chapter 11 effort.  Garland S.
Cassada, Esq., at Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, serves as counsel
For asbestos matters.

The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants in the
Chapter 11 cases is represented by Travis W. Moon, Esq., at
Hamilton Moon Stephens Steele & Martin, PLLC, in Charlotte, NC,
Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, in New
York, and Trevor W. Swett III, Esq., Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq., and
Jeanna Rickards Koski, Esq., in Washington, D.C. 20005.

Joseph W. Grier, III, the Court-appointed legal representative for
future asbestos claimants, has retained A. Cotten Wright, Esq., at
Grier Furr & Crisp, PA, and Richard H. Wyron, Esq., and Jonathan P.
Guy, Esq., at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, as his
co-counsel.

Judge George Hodges of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of North Carolina on Jan. 10, 2014, entered an order
estimating the liability for present and future mesothelioma claims
against Garlock Sealing at $125 million, consistent with the
positions GST put forth at trial.

In January 2015, the Debtors filed their Second Amended Plan of
Reorganization, which is backed by the Future Asbestos Claimants'
Representative (FCR).  The confirmation hearing is slated to begin
June 20, 2016.

Under the schedule for confirmation proceedings ordered by the
Court, objections to confirmation of the Plan that do not depend on
the results of voting were due Oct. 6, 2015, and confirmation
objections that depend on such results were due on Dec. 18, 2015.


GARLOCK SEALING: Says FCR Has Right to Vote; PI Panel Disagrees
---------------------------------------------------------------
Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al., and the Future Asbestos
Claimants' Representative (FCR) oppose the summary judgment motions
filed by the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury
Claimants contending that (i) the Plan is unconfirmable because it
does not comply with section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, and
(ii) the FCR cannot vote on behalf of his constituents if Classes 4
and 5 are impaired.

Attorneys for the Debtors and the FCR argue:

   * First, the Committee's argument that 524(g) is the exclusive
remedy for bankruptcy cases involving asbestos claims is
contradicted by section 524(g)'s Rule of Construction, which
provides that 524(g) shall not "be construed to modify, impair, or
supersede any other authority the court has to issue injunctions in
connection with an order confirming a plan of reorganization." That
authority includes the lawful injunctions sought by Debtors' Plan,
which discharges Garlock and Garrison and protects certain third
parties from claims settled by the estate, while leaving asbestos
creditors with rights worth multiples of the estimated allowed
amount of their claims.  The Committee knows section 524(g) is not
exclusive.  In the General Motors case (known as Motors
Liquidation), the confirmed plan created a trust to pay current and
future asbestos claims and provided broad protection to third
parties, all without invoking section 524(g). Confirmation of the
plan was supported by the asbestos creditors committee, composed of
many of the same firms as this Committee, and represented by the
same counsel, Caplin & Drysdale.  If that injunction, relying upon
section 105(a) alone, was lawful, then the Plan's reliance on a
discharge injunction and Parent Settlement Enforcement Injunction
that rest on independent authority under the Code and provide
relief substantively different from 524(g) must be lawful as well.

   * Second, the Committee's argument that the FCR should be denied
the right to vote on behalf of his constituents, the largest
creditor group in this case, is not supported by either the
language of the Bankruptcy Code or a single case that stands for
that proposition.  The Committee cannot escape the legal reality
that future claimants hold voting claims under the Code, which can
be voted only by their representative, the FCR. There are numerous
cases where courts have permitted FCRs to vote on behalf of future
claimants.  The same result must obtain here too if the FCR is to
represent, as he has been ordered to do, the rights and interest of
future claimants, a group squarely adverse to current claimants.

   * Not only do the Committee's positions lack legal merit, they
are part of an effort by the Committee to give its constituents and
their lawyers final say over whether any plan is confirmed in these
cases.  There is a rich irony in the Committee seeking to use
section 524(g) -- a statute enacted to protect future claimants --
to enhance the power of current claimants and block a Plan
supported by the future claimants' duly appointed representative.
Congress never intended this.  It did not make Section 524(g)
exclusive, and it did not preclude other solutions that are fair
and authorized by the Code, such as this Plan.

The Debtors and the FCR assert that the Committee's motions should
be denied, and ask the Court to approve their motion for partial
summary judgment that Section 524(g) is not exclusive and FCR has
the authority to vote on behalf of its constituents.

                       Committee's Objection

The PI Committee filed an objection to the Debtors-FCR Summary
Judgment Motion.

Summary judgment is properly awarded when the moving party
demonstrates no genuine issue of material fact and entitlement to
judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).  The PI
Committee insists the Debtors and the FCR are not entitled to
judgment as a matter of law.  Indeed, they are asking the
Bankruptcy Court to render decisions without precedent.

The PI Committee reminds that Section 524(g) has been on the
statute books for more than 20 years.  Since its enactment,
asbestos debtors in scores of bankruptcy cases have reorganized and
obtained channeling injunctions in accordance with Sec. 524(g)'s
requirements. In the 20-plus years following its enactment, no
court has ever ruled that Sec. 524(g) is an optional "safe harbor."
No court has ever ruled that injunctive relief equivalent to that
under Sec. 524(g) may be obtained through a different provision of
the Bankruptcy Code and without complying with Sec. 524(g)'s
explicit requirements.  No court has ever ruled, over an interested
party's objection, that a bankruptcy fiduciary appointed to protect
the rights of future asbestos claimants has the legal capacity and
authority to cast a ballot on a Chapter 11 plan for future
claimants as a class.  The legal authorities cited by the Debtors
and the FCR are inapposite and distinguishable. In key respects,
the arguments of the Debtors and the FCR contradict existing
authority."

The Committee notes that in 35 years of asbestos reorganizations,
encompassing nearly one hundred cases, no future asbestos
claimants' representative has ever before claimed a voting right
over objection (one was given a vote by agreement of the parties in
an obscure case involving a fully consensual plan).  It points out
that no court has ever ruled or even hinted that a reorganizing
defendant and a future asbestos claimants' representative could set
up a cramdown contest by having the latter cast a ballot accepting
a plan on the purported behalf of future claimants as a class.

                           *     *     *

Special Corporate and Litigation Counsel to the Debtors:

         Garland S. Cassada, Esq.
         Jonathan C. Krisko, Esq.
         Richard C. Worf, Jr., Esq.
         ROBINSON BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A.
         101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900
         Charlotte, NC 28246
         Telephone: (704) 377-2536
         Facsimile: (704) 378-4000
         E-mail: gcassada@rbh.com
                 jkrisko@rbh.com
                 rworf@rbh.com

Counsel to the Debtors:

         Richard Rayburn, Jr., Esq.
         Albert F. Durham, Esq.
         John R. Miller, Jr., Esq.
         RAYBURN COOPER & DURHAM, P.A.
         1200 Carillion, 227 West Trade Street
         Charlotte, NC 28202
         Telephone: (704) 334-0891

Counsel for Joseph W. Grier, III, the FCR:

         ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
         Jonathan P. Guy, Esq.
         Gregory D. Beaman, Esq.
         1152 15th Street, N.W.
         Washington, DC 20005
         Telephone: (202) 339-8400
         E-mail: jguy@orrick.com
                 gbeaman@orrick.com

                - and -

         A. Cotten Wright, Esq.
         GRIER FURR & CRISP, PA
         101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1240
         Charlotte, NC 28246
         Telephone: (704) 375-3720
         E-mail: cwright@grierlaw.com

Co-Counsel for the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury
Claimants:

         CAPLIN & DRYSDALE, CHARTERED
         Trevor W. Swett III, Esq.
         Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq.
         Jeffrey A. Liesemer, Esq.
         One Thomas Circle, N.W.
         Washington, D.C. 20005
         Telephone: (202) 862-5000
         E-mail: tswett@capdale.com
                 lkelleher@capdale.com
                 jliesemer@capdale.com

                - and -

         Elihu Inselbuch, Esq.
         600 Lexington Avenue, 21st Floor
         New York, NY 10022
         Telephone: (212) 379-6000
         E-mail: einselbuch@capdale.com

                  - and -

         MOON WRIGHT & HOUSTON, PLLC
         Travis W. Moon, Esq.
         Richard S. Wright, Esq.
         227 West Trade Street, Suite 1800
         Charlotte, NC 28202
         Telephone: (704) 944-6560
         E-mail: tmoon@mwhattorneys.com
                 rwright@mwhattorneys.com

                       About Garlock Sealing

Headquartered in Palmyra, New York, Garlock Sealing Technologies
LLC is a unit of EnPro Industries, Inc. (NYSE: NPO).  For more than
a century, Garlock has been helping customers efficiently seal the
toughest process fluids in the most demanding applications.

On June 5, 2010, Garlock filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition
(Bankr. W.D.N.C. Case No. 10-31607) in Charlotte, North Carolina,
to establish a trust to resolve all current and future asbestos
claims against Garlock under Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code.  The Debtor estimated $500 million to $1 billion in assets
and up to $500 million in debts as of the Petition Date.

Affiliates The Anchor Packing Company and Garrison Litigation
Management Group, Ltd., also filed for bankruptcy.

Albert F. Durham, Esq., at Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A.,
represents the Debtor in their Chapter 11 effort.  Garland S.
Cassada, Esq., at Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, serves as counsel
For asbestos matters.

The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants in the
Chapter 11 cases is represented by Travis W. Moon, Esq., at
Hamilton Moon Stephens Steele & Martin, PLLC, in Charlotte, NC,
Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, in New
York, and Trevor W. Swett III, Esq., Leslie M. Kelleher, Esq., and
Jeanna Rickards Koski, Esq., in Washington, D.C. 20005.

Joseph W. Grier, III, the Court-appointed legal representative for
future asbestos claimants, has retained A. Cotten Wright, Esq., at
Grier Furr & Crisp, PA, and Richard H. Wyron, Esq., and Jonathan
P. Guy, Esq., at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, as his
co-counsel.

Judge George Hodges of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of North Carolina on Jan. 10, 2014, entered an order
estimating the liability for present and future mesothelioma claims
against Garlock Sealing at $125 million, consistent with the
positions GST put forth at trial.

In January 2015, the Debtors filed their Second Amended Plan of
Reorganization, which is backed by the Future Asbestos Claimants'
Representative (FCR).  The confirmation hearing is slated to begin
June 20, 2016.

Under the schedule for confirmation proceedings ordered by the
Court, objections to confirmation of the Plan that do not depend on
the results of voting were due Oct. 6, 2015, and confirmation
objections that depend on such results are due on Dec. 18, 2015.


GENERAL CANNABIS: Posts Net Loss, Has Going Concern Doubt
---------------------------------------------------------
General Cannabis Corporation posted a net loss of $1,698,235 for
the three months ended September 30, 2015, compared to a net loss
of $1,746,660 for the same period in 2014.

Furthermore, the company had an accumulated deficit of $14,517,051
and $7,641,101, respectively, at September 30, 2015 and December
31, 2014, and further losses are anticipated in the development of
its business, according to Robert Frichtel, principal executive
officer, and Shelly Whitson, principal financial and accounting
officer of the company in a regulatory filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 13, 2015.

"Accordingly, there is substantial doubt about the company's
ability to continue as a going concern."

Mr. Frichtel and Ms. Whitson pointed out, "The ability to continue
as a going concern is dependent upon the company generating
profitable operations in the future and/or obtaining the necessary
financing to meet its obligations and repay its liabilities arising
from normal business operations when they come due.   Management
believes that actions presently being taken to further implement
its business plan and generate additional revenues provide
opportunity for the company to continue as a going concern.   While
the company believes in the viability of its strategy to generate
additional revenues and its ability to raise additional funds,
there can be no assurances to that effect."

At September 30, 2015, the company had total assets of $3,934,658,
total liabilities of $4,852,395, and total stockholders' deficit of
$917,737.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/hykh734

Denver-based General Cannabis Corporation provides products and
services to the regulated cannabis industry.  The company's primary
operations include real estate leasing, shared office space,
networking and event services, security and cash management
services, industry finance, wholesale supply, and consulting and
advisory.



GOSNELL DEVELOPMENT: Remand Moots HFP Appeal, GDC Dismissal Bid
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hall Family Properties Limited appealed the bankruptcy court's
order remanding "unresolved adversary claims" to Maricopa County
Superior Court.  HFP also appealed the bankruptcy court's ruling on
HFP's proof of claim/adversary claims against Gosnell Development
Corporation of Arizona.  On March 31, 2015, GDC filed a motion to
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Judge G. Murray Snow of the United States District Court for the
District of Arizona found that the bankruptcy court never provided
the state court with a certified copy of the remand order or remand
ruling.  Thus, the judge explained, although the bankruptcy court
entered the remand order over 12 months prior, there is no
indication that the Maricopa County Superior Court is aware that
the proceedings are before it, or absent certification, whether
these orders are actually before it at all.  Judge Snow further
explained that because the bankruptcy court has not yet certified
its remand order and/or remand ruling to the Superior Court, the
bankruptcy court retains the ability to reconsider its remand.

The case is Hall Family Properties Limited, Appellant, v. Gosnell
Development Corporation of Arizona, Appellee, No.
CV-15-00289-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz.).

A full-text copy of Judge Murray's December 11, 2015 order is
available at http://is.gd/KmBzFqfrom Leagle.com.

Hall Family Properties Limited is represented by:

          Arthur E. Romley, Esq.
          ARTHUR E. ROMLEY LAW OFFICE
          4647 N 32nd St Ste 290
          Phoenix, AZ 85018
          Tel: (602) 252-3400
          Fax: (602) 252-3499

Gosnell Development Corporation of Arizona is represented by:

          Alisa Carol Lacey
          STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP
          1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100
          Phoenix, AZ 85004
          Tel: (602) 279-1600
          Fax: (602) 240-6925
          Email: alisa.lacey@stinson.com

            -- and --

          Douglas G. Wymore, Esq.
          Michael W. Carmel, Esq.
          MICHAEL E. CARMEL LTD.
          80 E. Columbus Ave.
          Phoenix, AZ 85012
          Tel: (602) 264-4965
          Email: michael@mcarmellaw.com


GREEN EARTH: Admits Going Concern Doubt Due to Limited Capital
--------------------------------------------------------------
Green Earth Technologies, Inc. said it has substantial doubt about
its ability to continue as a going concern.

"Due to the company's limited capital, recurring losses and
negative cash flows from operations and the company's limited
ability to pay outstanding liabilities, there is substantial doubt
about its ability to continue as a going concern," Walter Raquet,
chief executive officer of the company, in a November 16, 2015
regulatory filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

"Since inception, the company has incurred operating losses and
negative cash flows from operations.  As of September 30, 2015, the
company had an accumulated deficit of $88,407,000, with total
stockholders' deficit of $15,098,000.  The company had a working
capital deficit of $19,949,000 at September 30, 2015 and is
currently in default of the 3.25% Secured Note, Promissory Note and
the 6% Secured Notes issued to related parties disclosed.  These
notes matured on September 30, 2013 and June 30, 2013,
respectively, and have not been extended and are payable upon
demand.  The Promissory note matures on February 2016 but since the
February 2015 payment was not made it is in default."

According to Mr. Raquet, the company has undertaken, and will
continue to implement, various measures to address its financial
condition, including:

* Continue discussions with existing and potential new investors
   regarding an investment in the company.

* seek debt, equity and other forms of financing, including
   funding through strategic partnerships.

* attempt to increase revenues in order to reduce or eliminate
   the company's operating losses and enable it to meet its
   financial obligations.

* reduce expenses to conserve cash.

* defer certain marketing activities.

* investigate and pursue transactions with third parties,
   including strategic transactions and relationships.

Mr. Raquet disclosed, "The company plans to increase revenues in
order to reduce, or eliminate, its operating losses.  Additionally,
the company will attempt to raise capital from external sources in
order to enable it to continue to meet its financial obligations
until it achieves profitability or generates positive cash flow.

"There can be no assurance that the company will be able to secure
the additional funding the company needs.  If the company's efforts
to do so are unsuccessful, the company will be required to further
reduce or eliminate the company's operations.  These factors, among
others, raise substantial doubt about the company's ability to
continue as a going concern."

At September 30, 2015, the company had total assets of $11,474,000,
total liabilities of $26,572,000, and total stockholders' deficit
of $15,098,000.

The company posted a net income of $1,827,000 for the three months
ended September 30, 2015, compared to a net loss of $1,095,000 for
the same period in 2014.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/zlznxrq

Green Earth Technologies, Inc. (OTCQB: GETG) is a clean tech
company based in Greenwich, Connecticut.  The company creates,
develops, markets, sells and distributes an array of G-branded,
environmentally-friendly, bio-based well service, automotive,
marine and residential enhancement, performance and cleaning
products.



INERGETICS INC: Secured Parties to Auction Off Assets on Jan. 14
----------------------------------------------------------------
Magna Equities II LLC 31 Group LLC and Riverside Merchant Partners
LLC -- secured parties under a security agreement dated Sept. 1,
2015, as amended, executed by Inergetics Inc. and Millennium
Biotechnologies Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and
together with the Company, in favor of the secured parties --
intends to dispose of collateral at a public disposition to the
highest qualified bidder on Jan. 14, 2016, at 11:00 a.m., in the
Rotunda of the Courthouse of the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, New York, to be conducted by William Mannion, Auctioneer, NYC
DC.

Prospective bidders may contact:

   Mannion Auctions LLC
   305 Broadway, Room
   New York, New York 10007
   Email: info@mannionauctions.com

                      About Inergetics Inc.

Paramus, N.J.-based Inergetics, Inc., formerly Millennium
Biotechnologies Group, Inc., is a holding company for its
subsidiary Millennium Biotechnologies, Inc.  Millennium is a
research based bio-nutraceutical corporation involved in the field
of nutritional science.  Millennium's principal source of revenue
is from sales of its nutraceutical supplements, Resurgex Select(R)
and Resurgex Essential(TM) and Resurgex Essential Plus(TM) which
serve as a nutritional support for immuno-compromised individuals
undergoing medical treatment for chronic debilitating diseases.
Millennium has developed Surgex for the sport nutritional market.
The Company's efforts going forward will focus on sales of Surgex
in powder, bar and ready to drink forms.

Inergetics reported a net loss applicable to common shareholders of
$9.48 million on $1.99 million of net sales for the year ended Dec.
31, 2014, compared to a net loss applicable to common shareholders
of $5.74 million on $848,000 of net sales for the same period in
2013.

East Hanover, New Jersey, issued a "going concern" qualification on
the consolidated financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31,
2014, citing that the Company has incurred substantial accumulated
deficits and operating losses and has a working capital deficiency
of $10.6 million.  These conditions raise substantial doubt about
the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.


INVENTERGY GLOBAL: Regains Nasdaq Listing Compliance
----------------------------------------------------
Inventergy Global, Inc., a Silicon-Valley based intellectual
property company, on Dec. 23 disclosed that it has received a
letter from the Listing Qualifications Department of The Nasdaq
Stock Market notifying it that Inventergy has regained compliance
with Listing Rule 5550(a)(2), the minimum bid price requirement for
continued listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market, and that the matter
is now closed.

                About Inventergy Global, Inc.

Inventergy Global, Inc. is a Silicon Valley-based intellectual
property company dedicated to identifying, acquiring and licensing
patented technologies of market-significant technology leaders.
Led by IP industry pioneer and veteran Joe Beyers, the Company
leverages decades of corporate experience, market and technology
expertise, and industry connections to assist Fortune 500 companies
in leveraging the value of their innovations to achieve greater
returns.




KALOBIOS PHARMACEUTICALS: Receives Nasdaq Delisting Notice
----------------------------------------------------------
KaloBios Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on Dec. 23 disclosed that on
December 18, 2015, it received a letter from the Nasdaq Listing
Qualification Staff advising the Company that Nasdaq has determined
to delist the Company's securities pursuant to its discretionary
authority under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5101.  Nasdaq's letter to the
Company cited a number of reasons for their decision, including the
recent criminal indictment and arrest of Martin Shkreli, the
Company's controlling shareholder, former Chairman and former Chief
Executive Officer, based on allegations of securities fraud, among
other things, as well as the arrest and indictment of Evan Greebel,
the Company's former outside counsel, based on similar allegations,
and a civil complaint from the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission filed against Messrs. Shkreli and Greebel based on
similar allegations.  Nasdaq cited an additional basis for
delisting based on the Company non-compliance with the filing
requirements forth in the Nasdaq's Listing Rule 5250(c)(1) because
it has not filed its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended September 30, 2015.

The Company has not yet determined whether it will appeal the
Nasdaq Staff's decision to delist the Company's securities.  The
deadline for the Company to request an appeal is December 28, 2015.
If the Company does not appeal, the Company's common stock will be
suspended from trading on Nasdaq at the opening of business on
December 30, 2015.

                  About KaloBios Pharmaceuticals

Based in South San Francisco, Calif., KaloBios Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., is a company biopharmaceutical company focused on the
development of monoclonal antibody therapeutics.

The Company reported a net loss of $9.62 million on $nil of
revenues for the three months ended
Mar. 31, 2015, compared with a net loss of $10.4 million on $nil of
revenue for the same period last year.

The Company's balance sheet at March 31, 2015, showed $32.0 million
in total assets, $15.9 million in total liabilities, and a
stockholders' deficit of $16.1 million.


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Committee Members Say They Deserve $20M Payback
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Zalesin at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that banks and other
creditors' committee members from the New York bankruptcy of Lehman
Brothers Holdings said they deserve about $19.6 million in fees and
expenses, arguing they helped clean up an extraordinary mess by
sorting through assets including complex derivatives and private
equity interests.

The Bank of New York Mellon, Elliott Management Corp. and other
members of the unsecured creditors committee said they should be
paid fees and reimbursed for expenses because they made a
"substantial contribution" to resolving the Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. bankruptcy.

In a separate report, Jonathan Randles said that Lehman Brothers
has agreed to settle litigation with four former employees over
bonuses they say they were owed after the firm collapsed in 2008,
agreeing to set aside $38 million to satisfy their claim against
the estate.

LBI, the brokerage arm of Lehman Brothers, filed a stipulation
laying out the terms of the deal with ex-employees J. Robert
Chambers, Guy Hoffman, R. Kyle Kettler and P. Mathew Verghese.

                     About Lehman Brothers

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. -- http://www.lehman.com/--      
was the fourth largest investment bank in the United States.  
For more than 150 years, Lehman Brothers has been a leader in
the global financial markets by serving the financial needs of
corporations, governmental units, institutional clients and
individuals worldwide.

Lehman Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Sept. 15, 2008
(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 08-13555).  Lehman's bankruptcy
petition disclosed US$639 billion in assets and US$613 billion in
debts, effectively making the firm's bankruptcy filing the
largest in U.S. history.  Several other affiliates followed
thereafter.

Affiliates Merit LLC, LB Somerset LLC and LB Preferred Somerset
LLC sought for bankruptcy protection in December 2009.

The Debtors' bankruptcy cases are handled by Judge James M. Peck.
Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Richard P. Krasnow, Esq., Lori R. Fife,
Esq., Shai Y. Waisman, Esq., and Jacqueline Marcus, Esq., at
Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, in New York, represent Lehman.  Epiq
Bankruptcy Solutions serves as claims and noticing agent.

Dennis F. Dunne, Esq., Evan Fleck, Esq., and Dennis O'Donnell,
Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, in New York, serve
as counsel to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.  
Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin Capital, Inc., is the Committee's
investment banker.

On Sept. 19, 2008, the Honorable Gerard E. Lynch of the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York, entered an
order commencing liquidation of Lehman Brothers, Inc., pursuant
to the provisions of the Securities Investor Protection Act (Case
No. 08-CIV-8119 (GEL)).  James W. Giddens has been appointed as
trustee for the SIPA liquidation of the business of LBI.

The Bankruptcy Court approved Barclays Bank Plc's purchase of
Lehman Brothers' North American investment banking and capital
markets operations and supporting infrastructure for US$1.75
billion.  Nomura Holdings Inc., the largest brokerage house in
Japan, purchased LBHI's operations in Europe for US$2 plus the
retention of most of employees.  Nomura also bought Lehman's
operations in the Asia Pacific for US$225 million.

Lehman emerged from bankruptcy protection on March 6, 2012, more
than three years after it filed the largest bankruptcy in U.S.
history.  The Chapter 11 plan for the Lehman companies other than
the broker was confirmed in December 2011.

                          *     *     *

In October 2015, Lehman made its eighth distribution to creditors,
bringing Lehman's total distributions to unsecured creditors to
approximately $105.4 billion including (1) $77.2 billion of
payments on account of third-party claims, which includes
non-controlled affiliate claims and (2) $28.2 billion of payments
among the Lehman Debtors and their controlled affiliates.

As of September 2015, the trustee in charge of LBI has returned
around $7.65 billion to the defunct brokerage's unsecured
creditors, a recovery of about 35 cents on the dollar.


MOLYCORP INC: Lays Out Financial Estimates for Creditors
--------------------------------------------------------
Peg Brickley, writing for Dow Jones' Daily Bankruptcy Review,
reported that Molycorp Inc. laid out the financial facts that it
says justifies allowing it to exit chapter 11 bankruptcy in
trimmed-down form as opposed to being pushed into a liquidation.

According to the report, the rare-earths company says it would be
worth $252 million at most in a liquidation scenario, far from
enough to cover more than $2 billion in debts.  Oaktree Capital
Group, a major lender, would collect, at most, about half of what
it is owed if Molycorp's bid to exit bankruptcy whole fails,
according to estimates in new bankruptcy-court documents, the
report related.

                       About Molycorp Inc.

Molycorp Inc. -- http://www.molycorp.com/-- is a global rare
earths and rare metals producer.  Molycorp owns several prominent
rare earth processing facilities around the world.  It has a
workforce of 2,530 employees at locations on three continents.
Molycorp's Mountain Pass Rare Earth Facility in San Bernadino
County, California, is home to one of the world's largest and
richest deposits of rare earths.

Molycorp has corporate offices in the United States, Canada and
China.  CEO Geoffrey R. Bedford, and other senior management
members are located in Molycorp's corporate offices in Toronto,
Canada.  Other senior management members are located at its U.S.
corporate headquarters in Greenwood Village, Colorado.

Molycorp reported a net loss of $623 million in 2014, a net loss
of $377 million in 2013 and a net loss of $475 million in 2012.

As of March 31, 2015, the Company had $2.49 billion in total
assets, $1.78 billion in total liabilities and $709 million in
total stockholders' equity.

Molycorp and its North American subsidiaries, together with
certain of its non-operating subsidiaries outside of North
America, filed Chapter 11 voluntary petitions in Delaware (Bankr.
D. Del. Lead Case No. 15-11357) on June 25, 2015, after reaching
agreement with a group of lenders on a financial restructuring.
The Chapter 11 cases of Molycorp and 20 affiliated debts are
pending before Judge Christopher S. Sontchi.

The agreement provides for a financial restructuring of the
Company's $1.7 billion in debt and provides up to $225 million in
gross proceeds in new financing to support operations while the
Company completes negotiations with creditors.

The Company's operations outside of North America, with the
exception of non-operating companies in Luxembourg and Barbados,
are excluded from the filings.  Molycorp Rare Metals (Oklahoma),
LLC, with operations in Quapaw, Oklahoma, also is excluded from
the filings as it is not 100% owned by the Company.

Molycorp is being advised by the investment banking firm of Miller
Buckfire & Co. and is receiving financial advice from
AlixPartners, LLP.  Jones Day and Young, Conaway, Stargatt &
Taylor LLP act as legal counsel to the Company in this process.
Prime Clerk serves as claims and noticing agent.

Secured creditor Oaktree Capital Management L.P., consented to the
use of cash collateral and to extend postpetition financing.

On July 8, 2015, the U.S. trustee overseeing the Chapter 11 case
of Molycorp Inc. appointed eight creditors of the company to serve
on the official committee of unsecured creditors.


NEW GULF RESOURCES: Jan. 6 Meeting Set to Form Creditors' Panel
---------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Vara, Acting United States Trustee of Region 3, will hold an
organizational meeting on January 6, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. in the
bankruptcy case of New Gulf Resources, LLC, et al., et al.

The meeting will be held at:
        
         The DoubleTree Hotel
         700 King St., Salon C
         Wilmington, DE 19801

The sole purpose of the meeting will be to form a committee or
committees of unsecured creditors in the Debtors' case.

The organizational meeting is not the meeting of creditors pursuant
to Section 341 of the Bankruptcy Code.  A representative of the
Debtor, however, may attend the Organizational Meeting, and provide
background information regarding the bankruptcy cases.

To increase participation in the Chapter 11 proceeding, Section
1102 of the Bankruptcy Code requires that the United States Trustee
appoint a committee of unsecured creditors as soon as practicable.
The Committee ordinarily consists of the persons, willing to serve,
that hold the seven largest unsecured claims against the debtor of
the kinds represented on the committee. Section 1103 of the
Bankruptcy Code provides that the Committee may consult with the
debtor, investigate the debtor and its business operations and
participate in the formulation of a plan of reorganization.  The
Committee may also perform other services as are in the interests
of the unsecured creditors whom it represents.




NU-CAST STEP & SUPPLY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
--------------------------------------------------------
Debtor: Nu-Cast Step & Supply, Inc.
        11745 Woodbine
        Detroit, MI 48239

Case No.: 15-58539

Chapter 11 Petition Date: December 27, 2015

Court: United States Bankruptcy Court
       Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit)

Judge: Hon. Mark A. Randon

Debtor's Counsel: Robert N. Bassel, Esq.
                  ROBERT BASSEL, ATTORNEY
                  P.O. Box T
                  Clinton, MI 49236
                  Tel: (248) 677-1234
                  Fax: (248) 369-4749
                  Email: bbassel@gmail.com

Estimated Assets: $100,000 to $500,000

Estimated Liabilities: $1 million to $10 million

The petition was signed by Guilio Ledda, vice president.

The Debtor did not include a list of its largest unsecured
creditors when it filed the petition.


OCONEE REGIONAL: S&P Lowers Rating on Revenue Debt to 'CC'
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services has lowered its long-term rating
on Baldwin County Hospital Authority, Ga's revenue debt, issued for
Oconee Regional Medical Center (ORMC), to 'CC' from 'CCC'.
Standard & Poor's removed the rating from CreditWatch, where it had
been placed with negative implications Oct. 2, 2015. The outlook is
negative.

"The downgrade reflects ORMC's extremely weak financial profile
combined with significant management turnover, and our opinion that
the medical center's financial commitments appear to be
unsustainable in both the near and long terms," said Standard &
Poor's credit analyst Margaret McNamara.  "As a result, we believe
default to be a virtual certainty," Ms. McNamara added.

ORMC's financial position is very fragile, as its recent use of its
debt service reserve to fund its most recent debt service payment,
persistent and large operating losses, negative cash flow, and
limited and rapidly dwindling unrestricted reserves all
demonstrate.  Based on Standard & Poor's calculation, the medical
center lost $8.8 million from operations in fiscal 2015 after
positing similar losses is the previous two fiscal years.  At Sept.
30, 2015, ORMC had $8.7 million in unrestricted reserves (40 days
cash on hand).  However, S&P understands that after the
Dec. 1 bond payment, the medical center replaced the funds in the
debt service reserve with internal reserves.  According to
management, this contributed to further declines in unrestricted
reserves, to $2.5 million as of December 2015.  According to
documents filed on the electronic municipal market access website,
the debt service funds that were replaced will be held for by the
trustee, who will make these funds available to ORMC to pay
operating expenses should its cash on hand falls below $500,000.
This is a negotiated change to the structure of the debt service
reserve fund.  As well, should some events happen, the trustee will
use the fund to pay debt service.  Given ORMC's rate of operating
losses, S&P believes that near- and long-term liquidity risks are
considerable.

The negative outlook reflects S&P's view that a default is highly
likely.

S&P could revise the outlook to stable or raise the ratings if ORMC
were to demonstrate meaningful and sustained improvement in
operating results or if it were to improve liquidity, reducing the
risk of bankruptcy and alleviating acceleration risk pressure.
Alternatively, S&P could consider a positive rating action if an
outside party provided additional support.



PENN VIRGINIA: S&P Lowers CCR to 'CCC', Outlook Negative
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its corporate credit
rating on Randor, Pa.-based exploration and production (E&P)
company Penn Virginia Corp. (PVA) to 'CCC' from 'B-'.  The outlook
is negative.

At the same time, S&P lowered its issue-level ratings on the
company's senior unsecured debt to 'CC' from 'CCC'.  The recovery
rating on the debt remains '6', which indicates S&P's expectation
for negligible (0% to 10%) recovery in the event of a default.

"The downgrade reflects our assessment of the company's
deteriorating liquidity as weak crude oil and natural gas prices
continue to depress operating cash flows," said Standard & Poor's
credit analyst David Lagasse.  "We have revised our liquidity
assessment to weak from adequate, indicating our estimate of a
material liquidity deficit over the next 12 months, unless PVA is
able to raise equity or execute asset sales," he added.

The company expects to outspend cash flows in the fourth quarter of
2015 by about $15 million to $30 million.  Additionally, S&P
expects PVA to outspend cash flows in 2016.  

S&P assesses Penn Virginia's business risk profile as vulnerable
versus S&P's previous assessment of weak.  The revised business
risk profile incorporates weaker-than-expected profitability
measures compared with its peers.  The vulnerable business risk
profile reflects the company's participation in the cyclical and
capital-intensive E&P industry and the expected decline in the
company's reserve base.  Based on resulting financial measures, S&P
assess Penn Virginia's financial risk profile as highly leveraged.
S&P considers liquidity to be weak.

The negative outlook reflects S&P's view that Penn Virginia Corp.
will be unable to meet its financial obligations over the next 12
months, absent additional equity contributions or asset sales.

S&P could lower the rating if it viewed a default to be inevitable
within six months, absent unanticipated significantly favorable
changes in PVA's circumstances.

S&P could raise the rating if liquidity improved, which would most
likely occur if the company raised additional equity or executed an
asset sale.



PEP BOYS-MANNY: S&P Revises CreditWatch on 'B' CCR to Developing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services revised the CreditWatch
placement on its ratings on Philadelphia-based Pep Boys–Manny,
Moe & Jack, including the 'B' corporate credit rating, to
developing from positive.

"The CreditWatch revision follows Pep Boys' announcement that Icahn
Enterprises L.P.'s latest bid to acquire the company is a superior
proposal to Bridgestone Corp's (A/Stable/A-1), and plans to enter
into a definitive agreement with Icahn on Dec. 23, 2015, after 5
p.m. unless a counter offer is made.  We believe a purchase by
Icahn could be financed with a mix of debt and equity. We are
unable at this time to determine a credit impact on Pep Boys, but
we believe there is about a 50% chance that leverage would
increase," said credit analyst Samantha Stone.  "Bridgestone could
raise its offer--under the previously accepted offer by Japanese
tire manufacturer, Bridgestone Corp., we believe the transaction
would be financed with all cash and Pep Boy's debt would be
redeemed, given Bridgestone's size and financial wherewithal."

S&P will resolve the CreditWatch placement on Pep Boys when a final
potential buyer is determined and S&P receives more information on
how the potential transaction will be funded.



PINNACLE FOODS: Moody's Confirms Ba3 Corporate Family Rating
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service confirmed the Ba3 Corporate Family
Rating, Ba3-PD Probability of Default Rating, and B2 senior
unsecured debt instrument rating of Pinnacle Foods Finance, LLC
("Pinnacle"). Pinnacle's Ba2 senior secured rating remains under
review for downgrade, pending the final structure and terms of a
contemplated debt financing, which could affect this rating. The
Speculative Grade Liquidity rating, which was not affected by the
review, is affirmed at SGL-2.

On November 24, 2015 Moody's placed Pinnacle's ratings under review
for downgrade following the company's announcement that its parent
company, Pinnacle Foods, Inc., had entered into a definitive
agreement to acquire Boulder Brands, Inc. ("Boulder", B2) for $975
million, including $265 million of net debt. Pinnacle plans to
raise $900 million of debt financing and launch a cash tender offer
for Boulder Brands shares in the first quarter of 2016.

The Ba3 Corporate Family Rating reflects the high financial
leverage that would result from the proposed transaction, balanced
against Moody's expectation that Pinnacle would generate sufficient
free cash flow to restore credit metrics within 12 to 15 months
after the closing.

"We estimate that Pinnacle would be able to reduce debt/EBITDA from
about 5.5x at closing to below 5.0x within 15 months, assuming that
the company achieves at least half of the $30 million of two-year
targeted cost savings and maintains at least stable operating
performance," commented Brian Weddington, a Moody's Senior Credit
Officer.

Another key offset to near-term high leverage is the resulting
improvement in portfolio and channel mix. Specifically, the
addition of Boulder Brands would expand Pinnacle's product
offerings in better-for-you foods to approximately 55% of sales
from about 46% today. It also would further expand its distribution
capabilities in natural, gluten-free and organic foods channels.

A key challenge for Pinnacle would be to stabilize the declining
sales of the Smart Balance brand and to address various operating
challenges Boulder has faced in recent years.

Moody's has taken the following actions on Pinnacle Foods Finance
LLC:

Ratings confirmed:

Corporate Family Rating at Ba3;

Probability of Default Rating at Ba3-PD;

Gtd Senior Unsecured at B2 (LGD 6).

Rating affirmed:

Speculative Grade Liquidity rating at SGL-2.

Rating remaining under review for downgrade:

Senior Secured Bank Facility at Ba2 (LGD 3).

To fund the proposed transaction, Pinnacle plans to raise
approximately $900 million of debt, most of which would be secured
financing. Moody's does not anticipate that the mix of secured and
unsecured debt in this financing would affect the Corporate Family
Rating or the senior unsecured debt instrument ratings. However, an
all-secured debt financing would likely result in a one-notch
downgrade to the senior secured debt instrument ratings.

RATING RATIONALE

Pinnacle's Ba3 Corporate Family Rating (CFR) reflects the company's
portfolio of mature brands in frozen and shelf-stable food
categories that generate relatively stable operating performance,
albeit with limited growth potential. Pinnacle competes
successfully against food companies with greater scale, capital
resources and pricing power by focusing on optimizing its brand
investment and maintaining efficient operations. The rating also
reflects Moody's expectation that debt-financed acquisitions would
be followed by an ample period of de-leveraging to restore credit
metrics.

Pinnacle's ratings could be lowered if weak operating performance,
M&A integration challenges or a future leveraged acquisition would
likely cause Pinnacle's debt/EBITDA to be sustained above 5.0
times.

A rating upgrade would be considered if Moody's believes that
Pinnacle would likely reduce and sustain debt to EBITDA below 4.0
times.

Headquartered in Parsippany, New Jersey, Pinnacle Foods Finance LLC
— through its wholly-owned operating company, Pinnacle Foods
Group — manufactures and markets branded convenience food
products in the US and Canada. Key brands include Birds Eye and
Hungry-Man frozen dinners, Vlasic pickles, Wish Bone salad
dressings, Mrs. Paul's and Van de Kamp's frozen prepared sea food,
Log Cabin and Mrs. Butterworth's syrups and Duncan Hines cake
mixes. Net sales for the last twelve month period ended September
27, 2015 totaled approximately $2.6 billion.

Boulder, Colorado-based Boulder Brands, Inc. markets and
manufactures a wide array of healthy food products for sale mostly
in North America. The business consists of two segments: The
Natural segment (61% of fiscal 2014 sales) produces gluten-free
food products and healthy frozen foods under brand names such as
Udi's, Glutino and EVOL. The Balance segment (39% of sales)
produces healthy spreads as well as diabetic-friendly food products
under brands such as Smart Balance, Earth Balance and Level Life.
The company generated revenue of $508 million for the twelve months
ended September 30, 2015.



RAAM GLOBAL: Files Second Amended Ch. 11 Plan
---------------------------------------------
BankruptcyData reported that RAAM Global Energy filed with the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court a Second Amended Chapter 11 Plan and related
Disclosure Statement.

According to documents filed with the Court, the Plan provides for
the following recoveries: holders of Class 2 first lien credit
agreement claims will receive their pro rata share of, (a) if
Highbridge (or its affiliates) is the purchaser, (1) the
consideration provided in the purchase agreement, (2), the payment
of amounts necessary to satisfy the allowed first lien credit
agreement claims in cash from the liquidating trust assets
(excluding any funds held in the sale escrow), if any, and (3) the
payment of its share of litigation recoveries or (b) if Highbridge
(or its affiliates) is not the purchaser, payment in full in cash
from the sale proceeds; holders of Class 3B senior secured notes
deficiency claims will receive their will receive their pro rata
share of payment in cash, if any, from the liquidating trust assets
to be shared on a pro rata basis with holders of allowed ace
claims, allowed general unsecured trade claims and allowed general
unsecured non-trade claims not otherwise satisfied under the Plan;
Class 5: ace claims will receive (a) the ace settlement
distribution in cash from the sale escrow or sale proceeds and, (b)
any additional amounts, if any, recovered from the liquidating
trust assets to be shared on a pro rata basis with holders of
allowed senior secured notes deficiency claims, allowed general
unsecured trade claims and allowed general unsecured non-trade
claims not otherwise satisfied under the Plan; holders of Class 6
general unsecured non-trade claims will receive their pro rata
share of (a) the general unsecured trade claims' settlement
distribution in cash from the sale escrow or sale proceeds and (b)
any additional amounts, if any, recovered from the liquidating
trust assets to be shared on a pro rata basis with holders of
allowed senior secured notes deficiency claims, ace claims and
allowed ace claims and allowed general unsecured non-trade claims
not otherwise satisfied under the Plan; holders of Class 7 general
unsecured non-trade claims will receive their pro rata share of any
amounts, if any, recovered from the liquidating trust assets to be
shared on a pro rata basis with holders of allowed senior secured
notes deficiency claims, allowed ace claims and allowed general
unsecured trade claims not otherwise satisfied under the Plan.

                        About RAAM Global

RAAM Global Energy Company, Century Exploration New Orleans, LLC,
Century Exploration Houston, LLC, and Century Exploration
Resources, LLC filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions (Bankr. S.D.
Tex. Lead Case No. 15-35615) on Oct. 26, 2015.  The petitions were
signed by James R. Latimer as chief restructuring officer.

RAAM Global is an independent oil and natural gas exploration and
production company engaged in the exploration, development,
production, exploitation, and acquisition of oil and natural gas
properties.

The Debtors estimated assets of more than $50 million and
liabilities in the range of $100 million to $500 million.

The Debtors listed unsecured trade and vendor claims in the
aggregate amount of $3.3 million.


RED MOUNTAIN: Recurring Losses, Deficit Cast Going Concern Doubt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Red Mountain Resources, Inc.'s recurring losses from operations and
a working capital deficiency cast substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern, according to Alan W.
Barksdale, chief executive officer, and Hilda D. Kouvelis, chief
accounting officer of the company in a regulatory filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission dated November 13, 2015.

Mr. Barksdale and Ms. Kouvelis related: "The company incurred a net
loss of $38.1 million during the nine months ended March 31, 2015.
At March 31, 2015, the outstanding principal amount of the
company's debt was $32.5 million, net of an aggregate discount of
$1.3 million, and the company had a working capital deficit of
$16.0 million.  Of the outstanding debt, $27.5 million is
outstanding under the company's Credit Facility.  Of the $16.0
million working capital deficit at March 31, 2015, $27.5 million
relates to outstanding borrowings under the company's Credit
Facility, which is classified as a short-term liability on its
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2015.  

"The company is currently in default under the Credit Facility, and
the lender has the right to accelerate all amounts outstanding
under the Credit Facility upon notice to the borrowers.  The
company is in discussions with the lender regarding either a waiver
of the non-compliance or an amendment to the credit agreement to
cure the non-compliance.  While the company anticipates obtaining a
waiver from the lender, it cannot provide any assurance that these
negotiations will be successful.  The company is exploring
available financing options, including the sale of debt or equity.
If the company is unable to finance its operations on acceptable
terms or at all, its business, financial condition and results of
operations may be materially and adversely affected.

"As a result of recurring losses from operations and a working
capital deficiency, there is substantial doubt regarding the
company's ability to continue as a going concern."

At March 31, 2015, the company had total assets of $63,232,000,
total liabilities of $54,382,000, and total stockholders' equity of
$8,850,000.

The company incurred a net loss of $4,008,000 for the three months
ended March 31, 2015, compared to a net loss of $1,790,000 for the
same period in 2014.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/j4d23p3

Red Mountain Resources, Inc. has oil and natural gas properties in
the Permian Basin of West Texas and Southeast New Mexico, the
onshore Gulf Coast of Texas and Kansas.  This oil and gas company
is headquartered in Farmers Branch, Texas.



SCIO DIAMOND: Cites Going Concern Doubt, Management Plans
---------------------------------------------------------
Scio Diamond Technology Corporation has generated little revenue to
date and consequently its operations are subject to all risks
inherent in the establishment and commercial launch of a new
business enterprise, according to Gerald McGuire, chief executive
officer, and Jonathan Pfohl, chief financial officer of the company
in a November 13, 2015 regulatory filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission.

"These factors raise substantial doubt about the company's ability
to continue as a going concern."

The officers disclosed: "Management has responded to these
circumstances by taking the following actions:

* Successfully raised $1.565 million in the form of private
   placements of common shares to accredited investors. Funds have
   been used to fund current operations;

* Recently expanded and continue to optimize production of
   existing manufacturing capabilities to increase product
   revenues;

* Continued development of white gemstone material to expand our
   product offerings and enhance our product marketability; and

* Continue to explore strategic joint ventures and technology
   licensing agreements to expand company revenue and cash flow.

"In the opinion of management, these actions have been sufficient
to provide the company with the liquidity it needs to meet its
obligations and continue as a going concern.  There can be no
assurance, however, that the company will successfully implement
these plans.  If necessary, the company will pursue further
issuances of equity securities, and future credit facilities or
corporate borrowings.  Additional issuances of equity or
convertible debt securities will result in dilution to our current
stockholders."

At September 30, 2015, the company had total assets of $12,028,667,
total liabilities of $3,818,523, and total shareholders' equity of
$8,210,144.

The company's net loss for three month period ended September 30,
2015 was $809,588, compared to a net loss of $748,493 during the
three months ended September 30, 2014.

A full-text copy of the company's quarterly report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/p3k5dw3

Scio Diamond Technology Corporation is focused on man-made diamond
technology development and commercialization.  The Greenville,
South Carolina-based company creates single-crystal, Type IIa
diamonds for jewelry and industrial applications.



TERRA-GEN FINANCE: S&P Affirms 'B+' CCR & Revises Outlook to Neg.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said it affirmed its 'B+'
corporate credit rating on Terra-Gen Finance Co. LLC (TGF).  At the
same time, S&P affirmed its 'BB-' issue-level rating and left the
'2' recovery rating unchanged on the company's $300 million senior
secured term loan B due 2021 and $25 million revolving credit
facility due 2019.  In addition, S&P revised the outlook to
negative from stable.

S&P's rating action stems from the significant drop in wind speeds
that TGF has had this year.  Wind speeds have remained erratic due
to the persistent El Nino condition that has affected many parts of
the U.S., including California where most of TGF's wind assets are
located.  In particular, during the first half of 2015, TGF's
wind's production dipped by about 15% from our base case
expectation.  However, the TGF's wind project's availability
remained at 97%, in line with S&P's expectation.  In addition, the
downward revisions of S&P's U.S. natural gas price deck, resulting
in lower projected SRAC power prices paid to the company, affected
the company's wind, geothermal, and solar portfolios.

"Our current expectation is that the wind will revert to historical
averages, and so our long-term base case forecast related to wind
generation remains unchanged from our last review. However, with
the change to gas prices, our SRAC power price assumption has
altered leading to slower deleveraging," said Standard & Poor's
credit analyst Trevor D'Olier-Lees.

Under S&P's base case forecast, it now expects weaker financial
measures, with funds from operations (FFO) to total debt and total
debt to EBITDA at about 6.6% and 8.2x in 2016, compared with S&P's
previous view of 13% and 5.5x, respectively.

The negative outlook reflects S&P's view that the company is
deleveraging more slowly than we had expected due to lower wind
speeds and SRAC pricing and the related uncertainty regarding the
timing of recovery.



TORSPO HOCKEY: Court Denied Joy Group Oy's Bid for TRO
------------------------------------------------------
This case involves a dispute between Joy Group Oy and Supreme
Brands, L.L.C., over who has the rights to various trademarks.  The
matter is before the Court on a Motion for Temporary Restraining
Order brought by the Plaintiff.

Judge Donovan W. Frank of the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota denies the Plaintiff's motion.

Judge Frank held that it appears that the Defendant validly
acquired a security interest in Torspo Hockey International, Inc.'s
general intangibles, which also appears to include the TORSPO
Trademark Registration.  At the hearing on the matter, the
Defendant acknowledged that it is not claiming any interest in any
trademark application or international applications.  Because the
Plaintiff's Complaint contains no allegations that would undermine
the enforceability of the Defendant's security interest in the
TORSPO Trademark Registration against the Plaintiff as the alleged
purchaser or that the assignments of Village Bank's and Alliance
Bank's security interests are unenforceable, the Plaintiff has not
demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its
claims, Judge Frank further held.

In addition, Judge Frank ruled that the Plaintiff has failed to
meet its burden with respect to the remaining factors.  In
particular, the Plaintiff has not shown that it will suffer
irreparable harm absent an injunction because if the Defendant
proceeds with its proposed disposition, the parties will still have
rights and obligations provided under Article 9 of the Uniform
Commercial Code.  The public interest is best served by following
the filing system of the UCC.

The case is Joy Group Oy, Plaintiff, v. Supreme Brands L.L.C.,
Defendant, Civil No. 15-3676 (DWF/FLN).

A full-text copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order dated December
10, 2015 is available at http://is.gd/3cBpiDfrom Leagle.com.

Joy Group Oy, Plaintiff, represented by Keith A. Vogt, Esq.  & Paul
Allen Godfread, Esq. -- paul@godfreadlaw.com -- Godfread Law Firm.

Supreme Brands L.L.C., Defendant, represented by Joel D Nesset,
Esq. -- jnesset@cozen.com -- Cozen O'Connor, Nadia B Hasan, Esq. --
nhasan@cozen.com -- Cozen O'Connor, Steven Paul Katkov, Esq. --
skatkov@cozen.com -- Cozen O'Connor & Thomas P Kane, Esq. --
tkane@cozen.com -- Cozen O'Connor.


TRILOGY INTERNATIONAL: S&P Lowers Corporate Credit Rating to 'CCC'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said it lowered its corporate
credit rating on Trilogy International Partners LLC to 'CCC' from
'B-'.  At the same time, S&P lowered the rating on the company's
senior secured notes to 'CC' from 'CCC', which is two notches below
S&P's corporate credit rating, reflecting the structurally
subordinated position of the holding company's debt to its
subsidiaries.  At the same time, S&P placed all of the ratings on
CreditWatch with negative implications.

The downgrade reflects S&P's view that Trilogy's capital structure
appears unsustainable in the short term.  The company could default
if it is unable to refinance its senior secured debt ratings.
Trilogy's upcoming debt maturities lead to a "weak" liquidity
assessment, under S&P's criteria.  S&P intends to resolve its
CreditWatch listing when it has more information regarding
Trilogy's near term plans to address the refinancing of its notes.


S&P could lower the ratings in the next two months if it views a
default, distressed exchange, or redemption to be inevitable within
six months, per S&P's criteria.



TWENTYEIGHTY INC: S&P Lowers CCR to 'CCC'; Outlook Negative
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Rating Services said that it lowered its
corporate credit rating on Broomfield, Colo.-based TwentyEighty
Inc. to 'CCC' from 'B-'.  The rating outlook is negative.

S&P also lowered its issue-level rating on the company's $399
million senior secured credit facility due 2019 to 'CCC' from
'B-'.  The '3' recovery rating remains unchanged, indicating S&P's
expectation for meaningful recovery (50%-70%; lower half of the
range) of principal in the event of a payment default.

"The downgrades reflect TwentyEighty's narrow covenant cushion of
4% and our view that the company's weak operating performance will
continue to pressure liquidity," said Standard & Poor's credit
analyst Heidi Zhang.  "TwentyEighty's weak operating
underperformance in the third quarter of 2015 was largely due to
lower-than-anticipated large licensing deals closing, continued
weakness in the oil and gas industries, and higher-than-expected
expenses."

The negative rating outlook reflects the risk that TwentyEighty may
violate its financial covenant, and its liquidity could become more
strained due to continued weak operating performance, covenant
step-downs, and meaningful execution risk as the substantially new
management continues to integrate its recent acquisitions.

S&P could upgrade the TwentyEighty's one notch to a 'CCC+' if S&P
believes that, over the next 12 months, the company will be able to
maintain covenant compliance and its liquidity sources will be more
than sufficient to its cover operating needs, including earn-out
payments.

S&P could lower the rating one notch to 'CCC-' if a covenant
violation or debt-for-equity exchange appears inevitable within six
months, absent unanticipated significantly favorable changes in the
company's circumstances.



VALLEY FORGE: Thompson Coburn Wants Negligence Claims Dropped
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Wolf at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that Thompson Coburn LLP
told a Pennsylvania federal judge on Dec. 21, 215, that negligence
claims brought against it by the Chapter 7 trustee of Valley Forge
Composite Technologies Inc. must be dismissed because no connection
exists between the firm's counseling and the CEO's illegal sales of
military-grade components to China.

Trustee John P. Neblett is alleging Thompson Coburn attorney
Michael Hawthorne gave the anti-terrorism technology developer
"negligent" advice on what to report in a U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission filing about the viability of a company
investment.

                        About Valley Forge

Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc., sought Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection (Banrk. M.D. Pa. Case No. 13-05253) on
Oct. 9, 2013.  The case is assigned to Judge John J. Thomas.  The
Company, which produces technology products, is represented by
Maurice R. Mitts of Mitts Milavec.


XIANGTIAN (USA): Recurring Losses Cast Going Concern Doubt
----------------------------------------------------------
Xiangtian (USA) Air Power Co., Ltd. has incurred losses since its
inception resulting in an accumulated deficit of $1,553,110 at
April 30, 2015 and $491,657 in cash and $806,218 in receivables at
April 30, 2015, according to Zhiqi Zhang, chief executive officer
of the company, in a November 13, 2015 regulatory filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

"Although the company generated revenues for the first time in the
amount of $1,133,522 in the quarter ended April 30, 2015, further
losses are anticipated in the development of its business raising
substantial doubt about the company's ability to continue as a
going concern."

Mr. Zhang told the SEC, "The ability to continue as a going concern
is dependent upon the company generating profitable operations in
the future and/or obtaining the necessary financing to meet its
obligations and repay its liabilities arising from normal business
operations when they become due.  The company expects to finance
operations primarily through cash flow from revenue and capital
contributions from principal shareholders.  There can be no
assurance that the company will be successful in its plans
described or in attracting equity or alternative financing on
acceptable terms, or if at all."

At July 31, 2015, the company had total assets of $21,323,625,
total liabilities of $11,774,143, and total stockholders' equity of
$9,549,482.

The company posted a net income of $657,460 for the year ended July
31, 2015, compared to a net loss of $681,194 for the year ended
July 31, 2014.

A full-text copy of the company's annual report is available for
free at: http://tinyurl.com/h8vsjp5

Xiangtian (USA) Air Power Co., Ltd. utilizes a proprietary
compressed air energy storage power generation technology that can
store energy for other alternative energy sources.  The Sanhe City,
China-based company produces its systems primarily for Chinese
customers and is exploring foreign markets.  



[*] For Texas Energy Companies, Chapter 11 Loomed Large in 2015
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jess Davis at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that Texas energy
companies hard hit by declining oil prices are dominating the
bankruptcy filings that have started to reach courts at an
accelerated pace as 2015 winds down.

As oil prices continue to hover below $40 a barrel, and while
efforts continue to sell off assets and restructure debt out of
court, more energy companies have been filing for Chapter 11
protection in the last few months of the year.

Overall, oil patch bankruptcies filed in Delaware this year include
more than $9 billion in secured and unsecured debt, followed by New
York with about $2.8 billion and Texas with more than $1.5 billion,
according to court records and a report by Haynes and Boone LLP.
From there, it's a steep dropoff to fourth-place Canada, with just
$260 million.

Texas is seeing a higher volume of energy bankruptcies than other
jurisdictions, with more than 20 Chapter 11 proceedings filed this
year by energy producers and service companies.  Delaware, Colorado
and Canada each have fewer than 10 bankruptcies from exploration
and production companies.

Quicksilver Resources, with $2 billion in debt, chose Delaware.  So
did Magnum Hunter Resources Corp. in its $1.1 billion debt
reorganization effort, Milagro Oil & Gas Inc. with its
approximately $1 billion in debt and Samson Resources Corp. with a
restructuring intended to shed nearly three quarters of its $4.2
billion debt.

New York’s energy bankruptcy landscape is dominated by Sabine Oil
& Gas’s $2.8 billion filing.

In Texas, at least one company, Samco Oil LLC, filed for bankruptcy
with less than $1 million in debt.  About a dozen Texas
bankruptcies list less than $100 million in debt -- among them WBH
Energy Partners, Arabella Petroleum and American Standard Energy
Corp.

Dune Energy filed in the Western District of Texas in March with
about $100 million in debt. BPZ Resources Inc. hit the Southern
District the next day with $238 million in debt. Duer Wagner Oil &
Gas listed debt of $122 million when it filed in May, and Black Elk
Energy listed $144 million in an August filing. RAAM Global Energy
Company had about $355 million in debts listed when it filed in
late October.

The largest bankruptcy to hit Texas so far is Energy & Exploration
Partners Inc. and affiliates, which on Dec. 7 filed for Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection in response to an involuntary filing by some
of its creditors. E&E lists outstanding debt of more than $1
billion, including about $765 million of principal outstanding on a
senior secured loan, $375 million owed through convertible notes
and more than $20 million owed to Chesapeake Exploration LLC.

On Dec. 8, energy producer TransCoastal Corp. and affiliate
CoreTerra Operating LLC filed Chapter 11 petitions in the Northern
District of Texas with a prepackaged plan to convert $21 million of
outstanding loans and obligations into equity in a reorganized
company.

Mid-December, Texas-centric New Gulf Resources LLC sought Chapter
11 protection in Delaware with a deal to reorganize more than $570
million in liabilities, and Cubic Energy filed a prepackaged plan
to swap $126.4 million in debt for virtually all of its reorganized
equity.

Looking ahead to 2016, more bankruptcies are expected and the pace
of filings will likely pick up speed if oil prices don’t improve,
Williams said.


[*] High Court Asked to Weigh Repose Statutes in $2-Bil. MBS Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cara Salvatore at Bankruptcy Law360 reported that Goldman Sachs,
Deutsche Bank and RBS have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a
suit claiming they lied in the sale of $2.1 billion worth of
mortgage-backed securities, opening a new front in the battle over
extenders for statutes of limitations and their stricter siblings,
statutes of repose.

RBS Securities Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co. and Deutsche Bank
Securities Inc. asked the high court Dec. 10 to take a new look at
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s securities fraud suit over
$2.1 billion in MBS.


[^] Large Companies with Insolvent Balance Sheet
------------------------------------------------
                                                 Total
                                                Share-      Total
                                    Total     Holders'    Working
                                   Assets       Equity    Capital
  Company         Ticker             ($MM)        ($MM)      ($MM)
  -------         ------           ------     --------    -------
ABSOLUTE SOFTWRE  ALSWF US          140.4        (51.4)     (47.6)
ABSOLUTE SOFTWRE  OU1 GR            140.4        (51.4)     (47.6)
ABSOLUTE SOFTWRE  ABT CN            140.4        (51.4)     (47.6)
ACCRETIVE HEALTH  ACHI US           490.9       (223.5)    (126.7)
ADVANCED EMISSIO  ADES US           106.4        (46.1)     (15.3)
ADVENT SOFTWARE   ADVS US           424.8        (50.1)    (110.8)
AEROJET ROCKETDY  GCY TH          1,957.4       (107.2)      96.3
AEROJET ROCKETDY  AJRD US         1,957.4       (107.2)      96.3
AEROJET ROCKETDY  GCY GR          1,957.4       (107.2)      96.3
AIR CANADA        ADH2 GR        12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AIR CANADA        ADH2 TH        12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AIR CANADA        ACEUR EU       12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AIR CANADA        ADH2 QT        12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AIR CANADA        ACDVF US       12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AIR CANADA        AC CN          12,755.0        (51.0)     531.0
AK STEEL HLDG     AKS* MM         4,250.3       (484.7)     792.0
AMER RESTAUR-LP   ICTPU US           33.5         (4.0)      (6.2)
AMYLIN PHARMACEU  AMLN US         1,998.7        (42.4)     263.0
ANGIE'S LIST INC  8AL TH            173.2        (19.8)     (33.1)
ANGIE'S LIST INC  ANGI US           173.2        (19.8)     (33.1)
ANGIE'S LIST INC  8AL GR            173.2        (19.8)     (33.1)
ARCH COAL INC     ACI* MM         5,848.0       (605.4)     824.1
ARIAD PHARM       ARIA US           576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ARIAD PHARM       ARIACHF EU        576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ARIAD PHARM       ARIA SW           576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ARIAD PHARM       APS GR            576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ARIAD PHARM       APS TH            576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ARIAD PHARM       ARIAEUR EU        576.1        (49.7)     213.9
ASPEN TECHNOLOGY  AZPN US           266.8        (63.0)     (44.1)
ASPEN TECHNOLOGY  AST GR            266.8        (63.0)     (44.1)
AUTOZONE INC      AZO US          8,217.5     (1,778.1)    (721.4)
AUTOZONE INC      AZ5 GR          8,217.5     (1,778.1)    (721.4)
AUTOZONE INC      AZOEUR EU       8,217.5     (1,778.1)    (721.4)
AUTOZONE INC      AZ5 TH          8,217.5     (1,778.1)    (721.4)
AUTOZONE INC      AZ5 QT          8,217.5     (1,778.1)    (721.4)
AVID TECHNOLOGY   AVID US           264.2       (327.6)    (158.4)
AVID TECHNOLOGY   AVD GR            264.2       (327.6)    (158.4)
AVINTIV SPECIALT  POLGA US        1,991.4         (3.9)     322.1
AVON - BDR        AVON34 BZ       3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP* MM         3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP TH          3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP US          3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP GR          3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP CI          3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
AVON PRODUCTS     AVP QT          3,774.7       (768.4)     660.1
BARRACUDA NETWOR  CUDA US           421.3        (26.4)      42.0
BARRACUDA NETWOR  7BM GR            421.3        (26.4)      42.0
BENEFITFOCUS INC  BNFT US           172.4         (8.7)      28.3
BENEFITFOCUS INC  BTF GR            172.4         (8.7)      28.3
BERRY PLASTICS G  BP0 GR          5,028.0        (53.0)     678.0
BERRY PLASTICS G  BERY US         5,028.0        (53.0)     678.0
BLUE BIRD CORP    1291067D US       307.6       (133.8)       5.4
BLUE BIRD CORP    BLBD US           307.6       (133.8)       5.4
BLUE BUFFALO PET  B6B TH            479.1         (2.7)     290.6
BLUE BUFFALO PET  BUFF US           479.1         (2.7)     290.6
BLUE BUFFALO PET  B6B GR            479.1         (2.7)     290.6
BOMBARDIER INC-B  BBDBN MM       23,863.0     (3,660.0)   1,076.0
BOMBARDIER-B OLD  BBDYB BB       23,863.0     (3,660.0)   1,076.0
BOMBARDIER-B W/I  BBD/W CN       23,863.0     (3,660.0)   1,076.0
BRINKER INTL      EAT US          1,549.3       (108.1)    (201.0)
BRINKER INTL      BKJ GR          1,549.3       (108.1)    (201.0)
BURLINGTON STORE  BURL* MM        2,805.3       (121.9)     112.6
BURLINGTON STORE  BUI GR          2,805.3       (121.9)     112.6
BURLINGTON STORE  BURL US         2,805.3       (121.9)     112.6
CABLEVISION SY-A  CVY GR          6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CABLEVISION SY-A  CVCEUR EU       6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CABLEVISION SY-A  CVC US          6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CABLEVISION SY-A  CVY TH          6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CABLEVISION-W/I   CVC-W US        6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CABLEVISION-W/I   8441293Q US     6,745.7     (4,957.7)      39.4
CAMBIUM LEARNING  ABCD US           185.8        (72.7)     (12.7)
CASELLA WASTE     CWST US           660.7        (15.6)       4.9
CASELLA WASTE     WA3 GR            660.7        (15.6)       4.9
CENTENNIAL COMM   CYCL US         1,480.9       (925.9)     (52.1)
CHOICE HOTELS     CZH GR            712.8       (400.6)     168.4
CHOICE HOTELS     CHH US            712.8       (400.6)     168.4
CINCINNATI BELL   CIB GR          1,460.2       (323.3)     (38.6)
CINCINNATI BELL   CBB US          1,460.2       (323.3)     (38.6)
CLEAR CHANNEL-A   C7C GR          6,133.3       (297.8)     433.3
CLEAR CHANNEL-A   CCO US          6,133.3       (297.8)     433.3
COMMUNICATION     CSAL US         2,622.8     (1,092.2)       -
COMMUNICATION     8XC GR          2,622.8     (1,092.2)       -
CPI CARD GROUP I  CPB GR            289.3       (207.8)      55.7
CPI CARD GROUP I  PNT CN            289.3       (207.8)      55.7
CPI CARD GROUP I  PMTS US           289.3       (207.8)      55.7
CYAN INC          YCN GR            112.1        (18.4)      56.9
CYAN INC          CYNI US           112.1        (18.4)      56.9
DELEK LOGISTICS   DKL US            361.8        (11.7)       8.2
DELEK LOGISTICS   D6L GR            361.8        (11.7)       8.2
DENNY'S CORP      DE8 GR            289.7         (7.5)     (18.3)
DENNY'S CORP      DENN US           289.7         (7.5)     (18.3)
DIRECTV           DTVEUR EU      25,321.0     (3,463.0)   1,360.0
DIRECTV           DTV CI         25,321.0     (3,463.0)   1,360.0
DIRECTV           DTV US         25,321.0     (3,463.0)   1,360.0
DOMINO'S PIZZA    EZV TH            603.2     (1,255.9)     125.1
DOMINO'S PIZZA    EZV GR            603.2     (1,255.9)     125.1
DOMINO'S PIZZA    DPZ US            603.2     (1,255.9)     125.1
DUN & BRADSTREET  DB5 TH          2,082.4     (1,146.5)     (96.6)
DUN & BRADSTREET  DB5 GR          2,082.4     (1,146.5)     (96.6)
DUN & BRADSTREET  DNB1EUR EU      2,082.4     (1,146.5)     (96.6)
DUN & BRADSTREET  DNB US          2,082.4     (1,146.5)     (96.6)
DUNKIN' BRANDS G  2DB GR          3,348.1        (65.8)     285.7
DUNKIN' BRANDS G  DNKN US         3,348.1        (65.8)     285.7
DUNKIN' BRANDS G  2DB TH          3,348.1        (65.8)     285.7
DURATA THERAPEUT  DRTX US            82.1        (16.1)      11.7
DURATA THERAPEUT  DTA GR             82.1        (16.1)      11.7
DURATA THERAPEUT  DRTXEUR EU         82.1        (16.1)      11.7
EDGE THERAPEUTIC  EDGE US            58.5        (50.6)      47.1
EDGE THERAPEUTIC  EU5 GR             58.5        (50.6)      47.1
EDGEN GROUP INC   EDG US            883.8         (0.8)     409.2
ELRAY RESOURCES   ERAP GR             2.2         (8.4)      (9.9)
ENERGIZER HOLDIN  ENR US          1,629.6        (60.1)     658.7
EOS PETRO INC     EOPT US             1.2        (27.9)     (29.0)
EPL OIL & GAS IN  EPA1 GR         1,140.6       (388.7)    (257.6)
EPL OIL & GAS IN  EPL US          1,140.6       (388.7)    (257.6)
EXELIXIS INC      EXEL US           363.2        (74.2)     151.4
EXELIXIS INC      EXELEUR EU        363.2        (74.2)     151.4
EXELIXIS INC      EX9 TH            363.2        (74.2)     151.4
EXELIXIS INC      EX9 GR            363.2        (74.2)     151.4
FREESCALE SEMICO  1FS TH          3,159.0     (3,079.0)   1,264.0
FREESCALE SEMICO  FSLEUR EU       3,159.0     (3,079.0)   1,264.0
FREESCALE SEMICO  1FS GR          3,159.0     (3,079.0)   1,264.0
FREESCALE SEMICO  FSL US          3,159.0     (3,079.0)   1,264.0
FREESCALE SEMICO  1FS QT          3,159.0     (3,079.0)   1,264.0
GAMING AND LEISU  GLPI US         2,516.1       (236.6)     (98.2)
GAMING AND LEISU  2GL GR          2,516.1       (236.6)     (98.2)
GARDA WRLD -CL A  GW CN           1,828.2       (378.3)     124.2
GARTNER INC       GGRA GR         2,091.5       (159.6)    (173.7)
GARTNER INC       IT US           2,091.5       (159.6)    (173.7)
GENESIS HEALTHCA  GEN US          6,121.4       (306.4)     223.8
GENESIS HEALTHCA  SH11 GR         6,121.4       (306.4)     223.8
GENTIVA HEALTH    GHT GR          1,225.2       (285.2)     130.0
GENTIVA HEALTH    GTIV US         1,225.2       (285.2)     130.0
GLG PARTNERS INC  GLG US            400.0       (285.6)     156.9
GLG PARTNERS-UTS  GLG/U US          400.0       (285.6)     156.9
GOLD RESERVE INC  GRZ CN             15.0        (32.3)     (42.5)
GRAHAM PACKAGING  GRM US          2,947.5       (520.8)     298.5
GYMBOREE CORP/TH  GYMB US         1,242.0       (386.5)      30.8
H&R BLOCK INC     HRB US          2,289.9        (27.2)     160.2
H&R BLOCK INC     HRB TH          2,289.9        (27.2)     160.2
H&R BLOCK INC     HRB GR          2,289.9        (27.2)     160.2
H&R BLOCK INC     HRBEUR EU       2,289.9        (27.2)     160.2
HCA HOLDINGS INC  HCA US         31,896.0     (5,812.0)   2,908.0
HCA HOLDINGS INC  2BH GR         31,896.0     (5,812.0)   2,908.0
HCA HOLDINGS INC  2BH TH         31,896.0     (5,812.0)   2,908.0
HCA HOLDINGS INC  HCAEUR EU      31,896.0     (5,812.0)   2,908.0
HD SUPPLY HOLDIN  5HD GR          5,486.0       (126.0)   1,101.0
HD SUPPLY HOLDIN  HDS US          5,486.0       (126.0)   1,101.0
HECKMANN CORP-U   HEK/U US          582.6         (4.9)      50.0
HERBALIFE LTD     HLF US          2,421.5       (130.7)     461.6
HERBALIFE LTD     HOO GR          2,421.5       (130.7)     461.6
HERBALIFE LTD     HLFEUR EU       2,421.5       (130.7)     461.6
HOVNANIAN-A-WI    HOV-W US        2,602.3       (128.1)   1,612.1
HUGHES TELEMATIC  HUTCU US          110.2       (101.6)    (113.8)
IDEXX LABS        IDXX US         1,477.2        (38.8)       8.6
IDEXX LABS        IX1 TH          1,477.2        (38.8)       8.6
IDEXX LABS        IX1 GR          1,477.2        (38.8)       8.6
IMMUNOMEDICS INC  IMMU US            91.8        (18.9)      76.7
INFOR US INC      LWSN US         6,778.1       (460.0)    (305.9)
INSTRUCTURE INC   INST US            64.2        (15.3)     (15.5)
INTERNATIONAL WI  ITWG US           345.4         (9.7)      99.8
INVENTIV HEALTH   VTIV US         2,205.7       (699.2)     112.4
IPCS INC          IPCS US           559.2        (33.0)      72.1
ISTA PHARMACEUTI  ISTA US           124.7        (64.8)       2.2
J CREW GROUP INC  JCG US          1,627.1       (759.0)     111.7
JUST ENERGY GROU  1JE GR          1,281.8       (650.4)     (48.0)
JUST ENERGY GROU  JE US           1,281.8       (650.4)     (48.0)
JUST ENERGY GROU  JE CN           1,281.8       (650.4)     (48.0)
KEMPHARM INC      KMPH US            61.4         (5.7)      52.8
KEMPHARM INC      1GD GR             61.4         (5.7)      52.8
L BRANDS INC      LBEUR EU        7,969.0       (657.0)   1,836.0
L BRANDS INC      LTD GR          7,969.0       (657.0)   1,836.0
L BRANDS INC      LB US           7,969.0       (657.0)   1,836.0
L BRANDS INC      LTD TH          7,969.0       (657.0)   1,836.0
L BRANDS INC      LB* MM          7,969.0       (657.0)   1,836.0
LEAP WIRELESS     LWI GR          4,662.9       (125.1)     346.9
LEAP WIRELESS     LWI TH          4,662.9       (125.1)     346.9
LEAP WIRELESS     LEAP US         4,662.9       (125.1)     346.9
LORILLARD INC     LLV GR          4,154.0     (2,134.0)   1,135.0
LORILLARD INC     LO US           4,154.0     (2,134.0)   1,135.0
LORILLARD INC     LLV TH          4,154.0     (2,134.0)   1,135.0
MADISON-A/NEW-WI  MSGN-W US         863.1     (1,246.3)      78.8
MAJESCOR RESOURC  MJXEUR EU           0.0         (0.1)      (0.1)
MALIBU BOATS-A    M05 GR            195.3         (8.5)       9.7
MALIBU BOATS-A    MBUU US           195.3         (8.5)       9.7
MANNKIND CORP     MNKD IT           278.0       (124.6)    (196.1)
MARRIOTT INTL-A   MAQ GR          6,153.0     (3,589.0)  (1,786.0)
MARRIOTT INTL-A   MAQ QT          6,153.0     (3,589.0)  (1,786.0)
MARRIOTT INTL-A   MAR US          6,153.0     (3,589.0)  (1,786.0)
MARRIOTT INTL-A   MAQ TH          6,153.0     (3,589.0)  (1,786.0)
MDC COMM-W/I      MDZ/W CN        1,617.2       (376.7)    (326.5)
MDC PARTNERS-A    MD7A GR         1,617.2       (376.7)    (326.5)
MDC PARTNERS-A    MDZ/A CN        1,617.2       (376.7)    (326.5)
MDC PARTNERS-A    MDCA US         1,617.2       (376.7)    (326.5)
MDC PARTNERS-EXC  MDZ/N CN        1,617.2       (376.7)    (326.5)
MERITOR INC       AID1 GR         2,195.0       (646.0)     174.0
MERITOR INC       MTOR US         2,195.0       (646.0)     174.0
MERRIMACK PHARMA  MP6 GR            102.7       (140.7)     (24.3)
MERRIMACK PHARMA  MACK US           102.7       (140.7)     (24.3)
MICHAELS COS INC  MIM GR          2,083.1     (1,909.9)     585.9
MICHAELS COS INC  MIK US          2,083.1     (1,909.9)     585.9
MIDSTATES PETROL  MPO1EUR EU      1,298.1       (816.0)      96.2
MONEYGRAM INTERN  MGI US          4,511.4       (244.2)     (27.1)
MOODY'S CORP      DUT TH          4,772.9       (240.2)   1,811.9
MOODY'S CORP      MCOEUR EU       4,772.9       (240.2)   1,811.9
MOODY'S CORP      DUT GR          4,772.9       (240.2)   1,811.9
MOODY'S CORP      MCO US          4,772.9       (240.2)   1,811.9
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO  MSI US          8,086.0       (298.0)   2,758.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO  MTLA GR         8,086.0       (298.0)   2,758.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO  MOT TE          8,086.0       (298.0)   2,758.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO  MTLA TH         8,086.0       (298.0)   2,758.0
MPG OFFICE TRUST  1052394D US     1,280.0       (437.3)       -
MSG NETWORKS- A   MSGN US           863.1     (1,246.3)      78.8
MSG NETWORKS- A   1M4 TH            863.1     (1,246.3)      78.8
NATHANS FAMOUS    NFA GR             81.9        (61.6)      60.8
NATHANS FAMOUS    NATH US            81.9        (61.6)      60.8
NATIONAL CINEMED  NCMI US         1,006.2       (228.3)      65.4
NATIONAL CINEMED  XWM GR          1,006.2       (228.3)      65.4
NAVIDEA BIOPHARM  NAVB IT            17.5        (51.8)       8.7
NAVISTAR INTL     NAV US          6,692.0     (5,160.0)     834.0
NAVISTAR INTL     IHR GR          6,692.0     (5,160.0)     834.0
NAVISTAR INTL     IHR TH          6,692.0     (5,160.0)     834.0
NEFF CORP-CL A    NEFF US           656.3       (178.0)      20.5
NEW ENG RLTY-LP   NEN US            202.4        (30.1)       -
NORTHERN OIL AND  4LT GR          1,001.2        (28.3)      32.8
NORTHERN OIL AND  NOG US          1,001.2        (28.3)      32.8
NORTHWEST BIO     NWBO US            51.6        (57.4)     (80.2)
NORTHWEST BIO     NBYA GR            51.6        (57.4)     (80.2)
NTELOS HOLDINGS   NTLS US           668.4        (22.1)     150.8
OMEROS CORP       3O8 TH             41.4         (9.0)      17.2
OMEROS CORP       OMEREUR EU         41.4         (9.0)      17.2
OMEROS CORP       3O8 GR             41.4         (9.0)      17.2
OMEROS CORP       OMER US            41.4         (9.0)      17.2
OMTHERA PHARMACE  OMTH US            18.3         (8.5)     (12.0)
OUTERWALL INC     CS5 GR          1,266.8         (2.1)      (7.0)
OUTERWALL INC     OUTR US         1,266.8         (2.1)      (7.0)
PALM INC          PALM US         1,007.2         (6.2)     141.7
PBF LOGISTICS LP  11P GR            432.7       (191.5)      27.8
PBF LOGISTICS LP  PBFX US           432.7       (191.5)      27.8
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PMI1 IX        32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  4I1 TH         32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PM US          32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PMI EB         32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PM FP          32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PM1EUR EU      32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PM1CHF EU      32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  4I1 GR         32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PM1 TE         32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PHILIP MORRIS IN  PMI SW         32,011.0    (12,226.0)      10.0
PLANET FITNESS-A  PLNT US           701.1        (14.2)      (1.2)
PLANET FITNESS-A  3PL TH            701.1        (14.2)      (1.2)
PLANET FITNESS-A  3PL GR            701.1        (14.2)      (1.2)
PLAYBOY ENTERP-A  PLA/A US          165.8        (54.4)     (16.9)
PLAYBOY ENTERP-B  PLA US            165.8        (54.4)     (16.9)
PLY GEM HOLDINGS  PGEM US         1,311.1        (80.8)     264.6
PLY GEM HOLDINGS  PG6 GR          1,311.1        (80.8)     264.6
POLYMER GROUP-B   POLGB US        1,991.4         (3.9)     322.1
PROTALEX INC      PRTX US             1.1        (13.5)       0.6
PROTECTION ONE    PONE US           562.9        (61.8)      (7.6)
PURETECH HEALTH   PRTCL IX            -            -          -
PURETECH HEALTH   PRTC LN             -            -          -
PURETECH HEALTH   PRTCL EB            -            -          -
PURETECH HEALTH   PRTCGBX EU          -            -          -
QUALITY DISTRIBU  QLTY US           413.0        (22.9)     102.9
QUALITY DISTRIBU  QDZ GR            413.0        (22.9)     102.9
QUINTILES TRANSN  Q US            4,033.7       (179.9)     996.2
QUINTILES TRANSN  QTS GR          4,033.7       (179.9)     996.2
RAYONIER ADV      RYAM US         1,286.9        (17.0)     208.0
RAYONIER ADV      RYQ GR          1,286.9        (17.0)     208.0
REGAL ENTERTAI-A  RGC* MM         2,409.1       (902.0)    (133.8)
REGAL ENTERTAI-A  RGC US          2,409.1       (902.0)    (133.8)
REGAL ENTERTAI-A  RETA GR         2,409.1       (902.0)    (133.8)
RENAISSANCE LEA   RLRN US            57.0        (28.2)     (31.4)
RENTECH NITROGEN  RNF US            291.1       (138.0)      13.7
RENTECH NITROGEN  2RN GR            291.1       (138.0)      13.7
RENTPATH LLC      PRM US            208.0        (91.7)       3.6
REVLON INC-A      RVL1 GR         1,924.5       (623.3)     334.4
REVLON INC-A      REV US          1,924.5       (623.3)     334.4
ROUNDY'S INC      4R1 GR          1,095.7        (92.7)      59.7
ROUNDY'S INC      RNDY US         1,095.7        (92.7)      59.7
RURAL/METRO CORP  RURL US           303.7        (92.1)      72.4
SALLY BEAUTY HOL  SBH US          2,094.4       (297.8)     695.4
SALLY BEAUTY HOL  S7V GR          2,094.4       (297.8)     695.4
SANCHEZ ENERGY C  13S TH          1,532.2       (473.6)     171.9
SANCHEZ ENERGY C  SN US           1,532.2       (473.6)     171.9
SANCHEZ ENERGY C  13S GR          1,532.2       (473.6)     171.9
SANCHEZ ENERGY C  SN* MM          1,532.2       (473.6)     171.9
SBA COMM CORP-A   SBACEUR EU      7,396.8     (1,697.7)      46.6
SBA COMM CORP-A   SBAC US         7,396.8     (1,697.7)      46.6
SBA COMM CORP-A   SBJ TH          7,396.8     (1,697.7)      46.6
SBA COMM CORP-A   SBJ GR          7,396.8     (1,697.7)      46.6
SCIENTIFIC GAM-A  TJW GR          8,615.1       (980.8)     655.1
SCIENTIFIC GAM-A  SGMS US         8,615.1       (980.8)     655.1
SEARS HOLDINGS    SEE GR         12,769.0     (1,293.0)     701.0
SEARS HOLDINGS    SHLD US        12,769.0     (1,293.0)     701.0
SEARS HOLDINGS    SEE TH         12,769.0     (1,293.0)     701.0
SILVER SPRING NE  SSNI US           529.8        (99.3)     (31.1)
SILVER SPRING NE  9SI GR            529.8        (99.3)     (31.1)
SILVER SPRING NE  9SI TH            529.8        (99.3)     (31.1)
SIRIUS XM CANADA  XSR CN            293.1       (143.4)    (185.6)
SOLERA HOLDINGS   BXS GR          3,754.7        (10.8)     378.4
SOLERA HOLDINGS   SLH US          3,754.7        (10.8)     378.4
SPORTSMAN'S WARE  SPWH US           343.4        (14.0)      91.8
SPORTSMAN'S WARE  06S GR            343.4        (14.0)      91.8
STINGRAY - SUB V  RAY/A CN          128.2        (17.8)     (41.0)
STINGRAY DIG-VSV  RAY/B CN          128.2        (17.8)     (41.0)
SUN BIOPHARMA IN  SNBP US             -            -          -
SUPERVALU INC     SJ1 GR          4,612.0       (511.0)     (42.0)
SUPERVALU INC     SJ1 TH          4,612.0       (511.0)     (42.0)
SUPERVALU INC     SVU US          4,612.0       (511.0)     (42.0)
SYNERGY PHARMACE  S90 GR            144.0        (27.1)     123.4
SYNERGY PHARMACE  SGYPEUR EU        144.0        (27.1)     123.4
SYNERGY PHARMACE  SGYP US           144.0        (27.1)     123.4
THERAVANCE        HVE GR            437.6       (323.0)     212.5
THERAVANCE        THRX US           437.6       (323.0)     212.5
TRANSDIGM GROUP   TDG US          8,427.0     (1,038.3)   1,173.7
TRANSDIGM GROUP   T7D GR          8,427.0     (1,038.3)   1,173.7
TRINET GROUP INC  TNET US         1,609.6        (14.1)      54.4
TRINET GROUP INC  TN3 GR          1,609.6        (14.1)      54.4
UNISYS CORP       UIS US          2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
UNISYS CORP       USY1 TH         2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
UNISYS CORP       UIS1 SW         2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
UNISYS CORP       USY1 GR         2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
UNISYS CORP       UISEUR EU       2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
UNISYS CORP       UISCHF EU       2,097.9     (1,451.3)     124.7
VECTOR GROUP LTD  VGR GR          1,398.8        (56.8)     457.4
VECTOR GROUP LTD  VGR US          1,398.8        (56.8)     457.4
VENOCO INC        VQ US             403.8       (354.3)     195.7
VERISIGN INC      VRS TH          2,577.3     (1,031.4)     (38.8)
VERISIGN INC      VRSN US         2,577.3     (1,031.4)     (38.8)
VERISIGN INC      VRS GR          2,577.3     (1,031.4)     (38.8)
VERISIGN INC      VRS QT          2,577.3     (1,031.4)     (38.8)
VERIZON TELEMATI  HUTC US           110.2       (101.6)    (113.8)
VERSEON CORP      VSN LN              -            -          -
VIRGIN MOBILE-A   VM US             307.4       (244.2)    (138.3)
WEIGHT WATCHERS   WW6 TH          1,395.2     (1,337.7)    (193.6)
WEIGHT WATCHERS   WW6 QT          1,395.2     (1,337.7)    (193.6)
WEIGHT WATCHERS   WTW US          1,395.2     (1,337.7)    (193.6)
WEIGHT WATCHERS   WTWEUR EU       1,395.2     (1,337.7)    (193.6)
WEIGHT WATCHERS   WW6 GR          1,395.2     (1,337.7)    (193.6)
WEST CORP         WSTC US         3,556.9       (595.5)      (6.6)
WEST CORP         WT2 GR          3,556.9       (595.5)      (6.6)
WESTERN REFINING  WR2 GR            412.0        (28.1)      66.3
WESTERN REFINING  WNRL US           412.0        (28.1)      66.3
WINGSTOP INC      EWG GR            117.2        (14.3)       3.6
WINGSTOP INC      WING US           117.2        (14.3)       3.6
WINMARK CORP      GBZ GR             46.8        (36.0)      11.1
WINMARK CORP      WINA US            46.8        (36.0)      11.1
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYNN* MM        9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYR GR          9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYR TH          9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYNN SW         9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYNN US         9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
WYNN RESORTS LTD  WYNNCHF EU      9,981.2        (60.8)   1,234.7
XERIUM TECHNOLOG  XRM US            570.2       (107.3)      71.1
YRC WORLDWIDE IN  YEL1 GR         1,964.8       (427.3)     197.3
YRC WORLDWIDE IN  YEL1 TH         1,964.8       (427.3)     197.3
YRC WORLDWIDE IN  YRCW US         1,964.8       (427.3)     197.3


                            *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to nation's bankruptcy courts.  The list
includes links to freely downloadable images of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF format.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  
Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine
Tumanda, Valerie Udtuhan, Howard C. Tolentino, Carmel Paderog,
Meriam Fernandez, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R. Villacampa,
Sheryl Joy P. Olano, Psyche A. Castillon, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo
Fernandez, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2015.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.  Information contained
herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is
not guaranteed.

The TCR subscription rate is $975 for 6 months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Peter A.
Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-362-8552.

                   *** End of Transmission ***