/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/TCR_Public/220125.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, January 25, 2022, Vol. 26, No. 24
Headlines
203-205 NORTH: Williamsburg Building Up for Auction on Feb. 3
96 WYTHE ACQUISITIONS: Fights to Keep Mayer Brown as Counsel
ABILITY INC: SEC Seeks $24.3 Million Final Judgment
AGSPRING MISSISSIPPI: Wants May 9 Plan Exclusivity Extension
BLITMAN SARATOGA: Plan Exclusivity Extended Until Jan. 31
BLUE DOLPHIN: Fails to Comply With OTC Listing Standard
BOOZ ALLEN: S&P Alters Outlook to Positive, Affirms 'BB+' ICR
BRIGHT MOUNTAIN: Appoints CEO Matthew Drinkwater as Director
CAMP ENERGY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
CLUBHOUSE MEDIA: Signs $70K Note Purchase Deal With Sixth Street
COLE CAMP AUTO: Seeks to Hire Krigel & Krigel as Bankruptcy Counsel
CRECHALE PROPERTIES: To Seek Plan Confirmation March 24
DGS REALTY: Case Summary & Seven Unsecured Creditors
DLR EXPRESS: Court Approves Amended Disclosure Statement
EKSO BIONICS: CEO Jack Peurach Resigns; New Head Appointed
EVERGREEN I ASSOCIATES: Plan Exclusivity Extended Until Feb. 11
GAIA INTERACTIVE: Unsecureds Owed $6.47M to Get $25K in Plan
GARDEN VIEW: U.S. Trustee Unable to Appoint Committee
GENTREE LLC: Plan Disclosures Inadequate, UST Says
GENTREE LLC: Smoke Tree Says Plan Unconfirmable
GFA PEANUT ASSOCIATION: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
GREIF INC: S&P Raises Issuer Credit Rating to 'BB', Outlook Stable
GRUPO AEROMEXICO: All Eight Classes Voted in Favor of Plan
GRUPO AEROMEXICO: Faces Drama With Unsecured Creditors
HEO INC: Asks Court to Extend Plan Exclusivity Until June 15
HGL REALTY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
HILLTOP AT DIA: Hilco Touts Successful Sale of Vacant Land
IM SERVICES: U.S. Trustee Appoints Creditors' Committee
INVO BIOSCIENCE: Board Approves Non-Employee Director Compensation
ION GEOPHYSICAL: Inks Forbearance Agreement With PNC Bank
JIM'S DISPOSAL: Court Okays Disclosure and Confirms Plan
JINZHENG GROUP: Gets OK to Tap Shioda, Langley & Chang as Counsel
KLAUSNER LUMBER: Files Amendment to Disclosure Statement
LEGACY EDUCATION: Teams Up With The Cash Flow Academy
LIQUIDMETAL TECHNOLOGIES: Enters Into Golf License Agreement
LOUISIANA CRANE: Unsecureds Will Recover 10% in Plan
LTL MANAGEMENT: Court to Reinstate Talc Claimants' Committee
LYONS CHEVROLET: District Court Narrows AmeriCredit Suit
MALLINCKRODT PLC: K. Greathouse et al. May Proceed with Appeal
NHC FOOD: Prosperum's Suit Transferred to N.D. Georgia
PIPELINE FOODS: Unsecureds to Recover 1% to 1.9% in Plan
PRIMCOGENT SOLUTIONS: Hamilton Wingo Secures Appellate Ruling
PROSPECT-WOODWARD HOME: US Trustee Says Disclosures Inadequate
PWM PROPERTY: Loses Fight vs. HNA Group Over N.Y. Skyscraper
ROOSEVELT INN: Taps Valbridge as Real Estate Appraiser
SAN LUIS & RIO: Bids for Saratoga & North Creek Due Feb. 23
SANTA FE ARCHDIOCESE: Insurers Push to Settle Abuse Claims
SARATOGA AND NORTH CREEK: Court Confirms 2nd Amended Plan
SAVI TECHNOLOGY: Unsecureds Will Get 25% of Claims in 3 Years
SEADRILL NEW FINANCE: Exits Chapter 11 as Paratus Energy
SEANERGY MARITIME: Buys Back Additional $5M of Convertible Notes
SECONDWAVE CORP: Taps Law Offices of David C. Smith as Counsel
SELINSGROVE INSTITUTIONAL: Owes More Than $2.4-Mil. to Businesses
TEN DOLLAR CAR WASH: Continued Operation to Fund Plan Payments
TMT PROCUREMENT: 5th Cir. Affirms C Whale Sale to Pacific Orca
TRANQUILITY GROUP: Taps Silliman to Sell Branson Cedars Resort
TRANSDIGM INC: Moody's Alters Outlook on 'B1' CFR to Stable
TRIDENT BRANDS: Scott Chapman Quits as Director
TRIDENT BRANDS: Settles Everlast Litigation for $650K
VENUS CONCEPT: Receives FDA 510(k) Clearance for Venus BlissMAX
VERANO RECOVERY: Unsecured Creditors to be Paid in Full in Plan
VPR BRANDS: Issues $200K Promissory Notes to CEO
WALKER SERVICE: Unsecured Creditors to Recover 100% in Joint Plan
WAYNE BARTON: Study Center Hits Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection
WNJ24K LLC: Resolves Quest & Van Lambalgen Claims Issues
[*] Dorsey & Whitney Opens Phoenix Office
[*] Tucson Bankruptcy Filings Down for 2nd Straight Year
[*] Wilson Elser Promotes 19 Attorneys to Partners
[^] Large Companies with Insolvent Balance Sheet
*********
203-205 NORTH: Williamsburg Building Up for Auction on Feb. 3
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rosewood Realty Group will hold an auction on Feb. 3 2002, for the
sale of two contiguous buildings in prime Williamsburg, consisting
of 15 residential units and one retail unit owned by 203-205 North
Street. Opening bid is at $10 million.
About 203-205 North 8th Street Loft
203-205 North 8th Street Loft, LLC is a New York Limited Liability
Company having an address of 4403 15th Avenue, Brooklyn, New York
11219. The Debtor's business consists of ownership and operating
of
the Property located at 203 and 205 North 8th Street, Brooklyn,
New
York 11211 (Block: 2313, Lots: 28 and 29).
On Feb. 6, 2020, 203-205 North 8th Street Loft, LLC, filed a
petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Case
No.
20-40793), which was executed by Johnathan Rubin, as President of
the Debtor. The Debtor was estimated to have less than $1 million
in assets and liabilities. The Debtor is represented by KRISS &
FEUERSTEIN LLP.
96 WYTHE ACQUISITIONS: Fights to Keep Mayer Brown as Counsel
------------------------------------------------------------
James Nani of Bloomberg Law reports that Williamsburg Hotel owner
96 Wythe Acquisition LLC said the U.S. Trustee's push to disqualify
Mayer Brown LLP as bankruptcy counsel for the owner of the
Williamsburg Hotel would be the "death knell" for its
reorganization.
96 Wythe Acquisition pushed back Thursday, Jan. 20, 2022, against
an earlier motion from the Justice Department's bankruptcy watchdog
arguing that the firm should be taken off the case because of a
conflict of interest.
Disqualifying counsel just prior to the debtor's scheduled plan
confirmation hearing "would most likely precipitate liquidation,
which would be devastating to the estate," 96 Wythe said.
About 96 Wythe Acquisition
96 Wythe Acquisition, LLC, a privately held company in Brooklyn,
N.Y., filed a petition for Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
Case No. 21-22108) on Feb. 23, 2021, disclosing zero assets and
$79,990,206 in liabilities. CRO David Goldwasser signed the
petition.
Judge Robert D. Drain oversees the case.
The Debtor tapped Backenroth Frankel & Krinsky, LLP and Mayer
Brown, LLP as bankruptcy counsel; and Fern Flomenhaft, PLLC as
insurance counsel. Getzler Henrich & Associates, LLC and Hilco
Real Estate, LLC, serve as the Debtor's financial advisors.
ABILITY INC: SEC Seeks $24.3 Million Final Judgment
---------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to that stated in Note 11.A.8 of Ability Inc.'s
consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report
dated Dec. 31, 2020, which was published on March 29, 2021, with
respect to the bifurcated settlement agreement reached with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and according to which the
company and its subsidiary, Ability Computer Software Industries
Ltd., agreed to settle the first phase of the proceeding without
admitting or denying the charges attributed to them, in order to
discontinue litigating on the question of liability while leaving
the disgorgement amount to be decided by the court in the second
phase of the litigation based upon a motion to be made by the SEC,
the company updates that on Jan. 12, 2022, the SEC has filed such a
motion with the court.
The SEC's Motion asked the court to enter a final judgment against
the company and Ability Industries for approximately $24.3 million,
consisting of approximately $19 million in disgorgement and
approximately $5.3 million in prejudgment interest.
In addition, the SEC asked the court that for the purpose of
securing payment of the aforesaid amount, the court will impose a
constructive trust over the funds held under Ability Inc.'s name in
the put option escrow account and to turn those funds directly over
to the SEC to be distributed to investors. In this context, the
deposit was seized by the Israel Police by virtue of an assets
freeze order issued as part of an investigation subject to a gag
order, which Ability Inc. reported of on Sept. 16, 2019.
Ability Inc. is examining the implications of the motion, given the
insolvency proceedings pending before the Tel Aviv District Court,
as set forth in the immediate report dated July 14, 2021.
About Ability Inc.
Ability Inc. is a holding company operating through its
subsidiaries Ability Computer & Software Industries Ltd., Ability
Security Systems Ltd., and Telcostar, which provide advanced
interception, geolocation and cyber intelligence products and
solutions that serve the needs and increasing challenges of
security and intelligence agencies, military forces, law
enforcement agencies and homeland security agencies worldwide.
Ability Inc. reported a net and comprehensive loss of US$7.74
million for the year ended Dec. 31, 2019, compared to a net loss
and comprehensive loss of US$10.19 million for the year ended Dec.
31, 2018. As of June 30, 2020, the Company had US$14.14 million in
total assets, US$21.34 million in total liabilities, and a total
shareholders' deficit of US$7.20 million.
Ziv Haft, Certified Public Accountants (Isr.) BDO Member Firm, in
Tel Aviv, Israel, the Company's auditor since 2015, issued a "going
concern" qualification in its report dated June 15, 2020 citing
that the Company has an accumulated deficit, working capital
deficit, suffered recurring losses and has negative operating cash
flow. Additionally, the Company is under an investigation of the
Israeli Ministry of Defense, which ordered a suspension of certain
export licenses. Additionally, severe restrictions imposed by many
countries on global travel as a result of the coronavirus disease
of 2019 outbreak have impeded the Group's ability to complete the
phase of the systems acceptances. These matters, along with other
reasons, raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to
continue as a going concern.
AGSPRING MISSISSIPPI: Wants May 9 Plan Exclusivity Extension
------------------------------------------------------------
Agspring Mississippi Region, LLC, and its affiliates request the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware to extend the
exclusive periods during which the Debtors may file a Chapter 11
plan through and including May 9, 2022, and through and including
July 8, 2022, for soliciting acceptances of such plan.
Since the Petition Date, the Debtors have completed a marketing and
sale process for their "Big River" assets. Moreover, the Debtors
have already satisfied key milestones necessary for the successful
resolution of these chapter 11 cases, including completion and
filing of their schedules and statements, establishing claims bar
dates, and closing of the Sale.
The Debtors are involved in ongoing litigation in this and other
courts with Larry Tubbs, Tubbs Rice Dryers, Inc., Chief Ventures,
L.L.C. and Big River Grain, LLC related to the Tubbs Parties'
claims.
The Debtors are requesting an extension of the Exclusivity Periods
to focus their time and energy on post-closing transition issues,
the sale of other estate assets, and working towards ultimately
confirming a plan. Continued exclusivity will permit the Debtors
the ability to maintain flexibility in crafting an appropriate
plan. All of the Debtors' stakeholders will benefit from the
Debtors' focused efforts to maximize the value of the Debtors'
estates at this time. The DIP Lenders have consented to the
extension requested in the said motion. All creditor groups or
their advisors have had an opportunity to actively participate in
substantive discussions with the Debtors throughout these chapter
11 cases.
A copy of the Debtor's Motion to extend is available at
https://bit.ly/3Kwtam2 from PacerMonitor.com.
About Agspring Mississippi Region
Operating as a holding company, Agspring Mississippi Region, LLC --
https://agspring.com/ -- focuses on grain, oilseed, and specialty
crop handling, processing, and logistics operations.
Agspring and its affiliates sought protection under Chapter 11 of
the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No. 21-11238) on
Sept. 10, 2021. In the petition signed by Kyle Sturgeon, chief
restructuring officer, Agspring listed $10 million to $50 million
in assets and $100 million to $500 million in liabilities.
Judge Craig T. Goldblatt oversees the cases.
The Debtors tapped Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones, LLP and Dentons
US, LLP as bankruptcy counsel; Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP as
special counsel; Piper Sandler & Co. as investment banker; and
MERU, LLC as restructuring advisor. Kyle Sturgeon, managing
director at MERU, serves as the Debtors' chief restructuring
officer.
BLITMAN SARATOGA: Plan Exclusivity Extended Until Jan. 31
---------------------------------------------------------
At the behest of Blitman Saratoga, LLC, Judge Robert D. Drain of
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York
extended the period in which the Debtor may file and solicit
acceptances of the Plan through and including January 31, 2022, and
April 1, 2022, respectively.
When the Debtor obtained approval of DIP financing, the
construction resumed last year despite ongoing challenges posed by
shortages of labor and materials due to the pandemic. And in recent
months, construction has progressed, and the Debtor has focused on
completing its initial sales of three homes following various
settlements reached with the contract vendees.
The Debtor was able to negotiate the following:
(i) the termination of the contract for 11 Jane Street, so that the
property may be easily re-sold without further claims against the
estate;
(ii) in the other settlement, with the Colones, to finish their
home and close under the existing contract, subject to various
price adjustments; and
(iii) a multi-party arrangement for the sale of the model home at 4
Pamela Court, based upon the simultaneous purchase of the real
property on which the model home was constructed and sale of same
of Robert and Naomi McGehee for $725,000.
The Debtor anticipated a Chapter 11 plan filing by December 31,
2021. But with the immediate sales still pending, the Debtor has
determined that it needs time to update its projections and
complete negotiations with the Committee before filing a formal
plan. The Debtor anticipates that it will be able to file a
confirmable plan, with current information and projections, by the
end of January 2022.
The Debtor has also made progress on multiple fronts and is
committed to filing a plan of reorganization that has the support
of the Committee within the next month, although there is work to
be done. Nevertheless, the Committee consented to the motion for
extension while negotiations proceed.
The Debtor has been advised by Chambers that there are currently no
available hearing dates before the current extension deadline,
January 31, 2022.
A copy of the Debtor's Motion to extend is available at
https://bit.ly/3qTN3eY from PacerMonitor.com.
A copy of the Court's Extension Order is available at
https://bit.ly/3tOPDob from PacerMonitor.com.
About Blitman Saratoga
White Plains, N.Y.-based Blitman Saratoga LLC was formed in 2012 to
develop and build a residential community consisting of at least 77
single-family homes spread over approximately 149 acres on Geyser
Road in Saratoga County, N.Y. Blitman Saratoga sought protection
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No.
20-23177) on November 6, 2020. At the time of the filing, the
Debtor disclosed $5,857,288 in assets and $2,755,584 in
liabilities.
Judge Robert D. Drain oversees the case. Kevin J. Nash, Esq., at
Goldberg Weprin Finkel Goldstein LLP, is the Debtor's legal
counsel.
On December 21, 2020, the Office of the U.S. Trustee appointed an
official committee of unsecured creditors. The Committee tapped
Nolan Heller Kauffman, LLP as its bankruptcy counsel.
BLUE DOLPHIN: Fails to Comply With OTC Listing Standard
-------------------------------------------------------
Blue Dolphin Energy Company notified the OTC Markets Group in early
December that it would be unable to hold an annual meeting of
stockholders' within calendar year 2021 as required under Section
3.2 of the OTCQX Rules for Companies. At the time of its notice to
the OTC, the company indicated plans to hold its next annual
meeting of stockholders in May or June of 2022.
In a letter dated Jan. 14, 2022, the OTC confirmed that Blue
Dolphin failed to satisfy the standards for continued qualification
for the OTCQX U.S. tier. To regain compliance, the OTC granted the
company a cure period to hold an annual meeting of stockholders
within calendar year 2022. If the company is unable to regain
compliance within this time period, it will be moved from the OTCQX
U.S. tier to the Pink Market.
About Blue Dolphin
Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Blue Dolphin Energy Company --
http://www.blue-dolphin-energy.com-- is an independent downstream
energy company operating in the Gulf Coast region of the United
States. The Company's subsidiaries operate a light sweet-crude,
15,000-bpd crude distillation tower with approximately 1.2 million
bbls of petroleum storage tank capacity in Nixon, Texas. Blue
Dolphin was formed in 1986 as a Delaware corporation and is traded
on the OTCQX under the ticker symbol "BDCO."
Blue Dolphin reported a net loss of $14.46 million for the 12
months ended Dec. 31, 2020, compared to net income of $7.36
million for the 12 months ended Dec. 31, 2019. As of Sept. 30,
2021, the Company had $66.10 million in total assets, $87.08
million in total liabilities, and a total stockholders' deficit of
$20.99 million.
Sterling Heights, Michigan-based UHY LLP, the Company's auditor
since 2002, issued a "going concern" qualification in its report
dated March 31, 2021, citing that the Company is in default under
secured and related party loan agreements and has a net working
capital deficiency. These conditions raise substantial doubt about
the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.
BOOZ ALLEN: S&P Alters Outlook to Positive, Affirms 'BB+' ICR
-------------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 21, 2022, S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings,
including its 'BB+' issuer credit rating on McLean, Va.-based
government services provider Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. and revised
the outlook to positive from stable.
The positive outlook reflects S&P's expectation that the company
will continue to exhibit strong profitable growth while maintaining
moderate credit measures.
Solid defense spending, recent acquisitions, and Booz Allen
Hamilton Inc.'s (BAH) capabilities in key areas position the
company to reach scale that supports a higher rating. Demand for
the company's services is highly correlated to the U.S. defense
budget, and federal defense and intelligence organizations are
among the company's key customers. S&P said, "We anticipate defense
budgets will remain robust over the next two years, given the
government's prioritization of mission-critical work amid national
security challenges. We also view BAH's capabilities as
well-aligned with spending priorities. We anticipate sales will
grow 7%-10% in fiscal 2022 (ending March 31, 2022) through organic
and acquisition-related expansion, and 5%-8% per year thereafter on
the strength of its backlog and new contract opportunities. The
company's $29 billion backlog as of Sept. 30, 2021, is a record, up
18% from the previous year." New program wins have been the result
of growth in government spending and an increase of service
offerings into the information technology (IT) health services and
cyber markets.
BAH's ability to attract capable employees is key to continued
earnings growth. The company's focus on high-demand services, such
as cyber security, data analytics, and digital engineering, has
enabled it to maintain strong margins. S&P views BAH's ability to
attract and retain appropriate talent and expertise, especially a
workforce with security clearances, as a limiting factor on its
pace of growth. The company has had success finding new employees
to date and has not reported higher-than-typical turnover, despite
a challenging labor market.
BAH's capacity to generate cash flow is substantial, but financial
policy will determine credit ratios. S&P said, "We anticipate the
company will outspend internally generated cash flow over the next
several years in order to fund investment in its business,
acquisitions, and returning capital to shareholders. While we are
aware of no clear acquisition targets, we expect BAH would be
willing to increase leverage modestly to pursue an acquisition that
broadens capabilities. If no acquisition opportunities become
available, we expect it would engage in more aggressive share
repurchases, leading to higher leverage." Leverage will therefore
likely rise over time, approaching the company's target of 3x-3.5x
from the current 2.5x-3x.
S&P said, "The positive outlook reflects our expectation that BAH
will exhibit strong organic revenue growth while maintaining
favorable profitability and cash flow generating capacity. We
expect the company will make periodic sizable acquisitions and
share repurchases but debt to EBITDA will remain in the low-3x
area, compared with approximately 2.5x in 2022.
"We could raise the rating if BAH grows such that its scale, margin
and contract quality, and diversification are commensurate with our
expectations for a higher rating. This could occur if the company
continues to win and retain contracts in high-value areas such as
data analytics, digital engineering, and cyber security. We would
also expect BAH to maintain moderate credit metrics including debt
to EBITDA in the low-3x area on a sustained basis to reach a higher
rating.
"We could revise the outlook to stable if we anticipate that the
company's growth will slow or its profitability or cash flow
generating capacity weaken. This could occur if BAH underperforms
operationally such that it fails to win or retain contracts, or
cannot hire employees to fulfill contracts. We could also change to
the outlook to stable if we expect leverage to exceed 3.5x on a
sustained basis. This could occur if the company uses debt to
finance large acquisitions or share repurchases."
ESG credit indicators: E-2, S-2, G-2
BRIGHT MOUNTAIN: Appoints CEO Matthew Drinkwater as Director
------------------------------------------------------------
Bright Mountain Media, Inc. appointed Matthew Drinkwater, the
recently appointed chief executive officer, to its Board of
Directors.
Mr. Drinkwater, 48, is a digital executive with extensive,
progressively advancing leadership experience at iconic high tech
brands. From 2017 to the present, he served as the senior vice
president, International for BuzzFeed. He also was in Agency
Development and Global Accounts at Twitter from 2015 to 2017 and
head of Twitter's Global Online Sales in San Paolo, Brazil from
2013 through 2015. Mr. Drinkwater served as vice president of
Groupon East Coast from 2011 to 2013 and, senior director of Sales,
New England and Canada at Yahoo from 2009 to 2011. Mr. Drinkwater
holds a B.A. in Economics from College of the Holy Cross.
Mr. Drinkwater's employment contract's term is for three years.
The annual base salary is for $250,000 and he has a discretionary
bonus target equivalent to 100% of his base salary subject to
achievement of performance metrics. Lastly, he was granted 500,000
options of the company's common stock, which will vest at a rate of
25% per year beginning, Dec. 1, 2021.
About Bright Mountain
Based in Boca Raton, Fla., Bright Mountain Media, Inc. --
www.brightmountainmedia.com -- is an end-to-end digital media and
advertising services platform, efficiently connecting brands with
targeted consumer demographics. In addition to its corporate
website, the Company owns and/or manages 24 websites which are
customized to provide its niche users, including active, reserve
and retired military, law enforcement, first responders and other
public safety employees with products, information and news that
the Company believes may be of interest to them. The Company also
owns an ad network which was acquired in September 2017.
Bright Mountain reported a net loss of $72.71 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2020, a net loss of $4.17 million for the year ended
Dec. 31, 2019, and a net loss of $5.22 million for the year ended
Dec. 31, 2018. As of Dec. 31, 2020, the Company had $36.53 million
in total assets, $33.01 million in total liabilities, and $3.51
million in total shareholders' equity.
East Brunswick, New Jersey-based WithumSmith+Brown, PC, the
Company's auditor since 2021, issued a "going concern"
qualification in its report dated Dec. 23, 2021, citing that the
Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has a net
capital deficiency that raise substantial doubt about its ability
to continue as a going concern.
CAMP ENERGY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
----------------------------------------------
Debtor: Camp Energy, Ltd.
900 NE Loop 410, Suite E-103
San Antonio, TX 78209
Chapter 11 Petition Date: January 22, 2022
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court
Western District of Texas
Case No.: 22-50058
Debtor's Counsel: Catherine A. Curtis, Esq.
WICK PHILLIPS GOULD & MARTIN, LLP
3131 McKinney Ave Suite 500
Dallas, TX 75204
Tel: (214) 692-6200
E-mail: catherine.curtis@wickphillips.com
Estimated Assets: $1 million to $10 million
Estimated Liabilities: $1 million to $10 million
The petition was signed by William R. Patterson, interim manager.
The Debtor did not file together with the petition a list of its 20
largest unsecured creditors.
A full-text copy of the petition is available for free at
PacerMonitor.com at:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/view/QHXT7TY/Camp_Energy_Ltd__txwbke-22-50058__0001.0.pdf?mcid=tGE4TAMA
CLUBHOUSE MEDIA: Signs $70K Note Purchase Deal With Sixth Street
----------------------------------------------------------------
Clubhouse Media Group, Inc. entered into a Securities Purchase
Agreement, dated Jan. 12, 2022, with Sixth Street Lending LLC,
pursuant to which the company agreed to issue and sell a
convertible promissory note in the aggregate principal amount of
$70,125. The note has an original issue discount of $6,375,
resulting in gross proceeds to Clubhouse Media Group of $63,750.
The note bears interest at a rate of 10% per annum and matures on
Jan. 12, 2023. Any amount of principal or interest on the note
which is not paid when due will bear interest at a rate of 22% per
annum. The note may not be prepaid in whole or in part except as
provided in the note by way of conversion at the option of the
buyer.
The buyer has the right from time to time, and at any time during
the period beginning on the date that is 180 days following Jan.
12, 2022 and ending on the later of (i) Jan. 12, 2023, and (ii) the
date of payment of the default amount (as defined in the note), to
convert all or any part of the outstanding and unpaid principal
amount of the note into common stock, subject to a 4.99% equity
blocker.
The conversion price of the note equals the lesser of the variable
conversion price and $1.00. The "variable conversion price" means
75% multiplied by the lowest VWAP (as defined in the note) for
Clubhouse Media Group's common stock during the 20 trading date
period ending on the latest complete trading day prior to the
conversion date.
About Clubhouse Media
Las Vegas, Nevada-based Clubhouse Media Group, Inc. operates a
global network of professionally run content houses, each of which
has its own brand, influencer cohort and production capabilities.
The Company offers management, production and deal-making services
to its handpicked influencers, a management division for individual
influencer clients, and an investment arm for joint ventures and
acquisitions for companies in the social media influencer space.
Its management team consists of successful entrepreneurs with
financial, legal, marketing, and digital content creation
expertise.
Clubhouse Media reported a net loss of $2.58 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2020, compared to a net loss of $74,764 for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2019. As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company had $1.70
million in total assets, $7.95 million in total liabilities, and a
total stockholders' deficit of $6.25 million.
Spokane, Washington-based Fruci & Associates II, PLLC, the
Company's auditor since 2020, issued a "going concern"
qualification in its report dated March 15, 2021, citing that the
Company has net losses and negative working capital. These factors
raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as
a going concern.
COLE CAMP AUTO: Seeks to Hire Krigel & Krigel as Bankruptcy Counsel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cole Camp Auto Parts, LLC seeks approval from the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the Western District of Missouri to employ Krigel &
Krigel, P.C. to serve as legal counsel in its Chapter 11 case
The firm's services include:
a. advising the Debtor with respect to its powers and duties in
the continued management and operation of its business;
b. attending meetings and negotiating with representatives of
creditors and other parties in interest;
c. taking all necessary action to protect and preserve the
Debtor's estate, including the prosecution of actions on its
behalf, the defense of any actions commenced against the estate,
and objections to claims filed against the estate;
d. preparing legal papers;
e. negotiating and prosecuting all contracts for the sale of the
Debtor's assets, plan of reorganization, and all related documents,
and taking any action that is necessary for the Debtor to obtain
confirmation of the plan;
f. appearing before the court, the Subchapter V trustee and the
Office of the U.S. Trustee; and
g. performing all other necessary legal services for the
Debtor.
The hourly rates charged by the firm's attorneys and paralegals are
as follows:
Attorneys $350 per hour
Paralegals $75 per hour
The firm will also receive reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses
incurred.
Erlene Krigel, Esq., a partner at Krigel & Krigel, disclosed in a
court filing that the firm is a "disinterested person" as the term
is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.
The firm can be reached at:
Erlene W. Krigel, Esq.
Krigel & Krigel, P.C.
4520 Main Street, Suite 700
Kansas City, MO 64111
Tel: (816) 756-5800
Fax: (816) 756-1999
Email: ekrigel@krigelandkrigel.com
About Cole Camp Auto Parts
Cole Camp Auto Parts, LLC filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition
(Bankr. W.D. Mo. Case No. 22-20011) on Jan. 12, 2022, disclosing as
much as $1 million in both assets and liabilities. Judge Dennis R.
Dow oversees the case. The Debtor is represented by Erlene W.
Krigel, Esq., at Krigel & Krigel, P.C.
CRECHALE PROPERTIES: To Seek Plan Confirmation March 24
-------------------------------------------------------
Crechale Properties, LLC, won approval of the Disclosure Statement
explaining its Chapter 11 Plan and is slated to seek approval of
that Plan on March 24, 2022.
On Sept. 7, 2021, debtor Crechale Properties, LLC, filed with the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Mississippi a
Disclosure Statement and the Plan of Reorganization.
On Jan. 13, 2022, Judge Katharine M. Samson approved the Disclosure
Statement and ordered that:
* March 17, 2022, is fixed as the last day for filing written
objections to confirmation of the Plan.
* March 21, 2022, is fixed as the last day for submitting
ballots of acceptance or rejection of the Plan with the attorney
for the Debtor.
* March 24, 2022, at 1:30, in the William M. Colmer Federal
Building, Courtroom 2, 701 Main Street, Hattiesburg, Mississippi is
the hearing on confirmation of the Plan.
Presented by:
W. Jarrett Litte, Esq.
William J. Little, Jr., Esq.
LENTZ & LITTLE, P. A.
2505 14th Street, Suite 500
Gulfport, MS 39501
Tel: (228) 867-6050
E-mail: jarrett@lentzlittle.com
bill@lentzlittle.com
About Crechale Properties
Crechale Properties, LLC, is a Hattiesburg, Miss.-based company
engaged in the operation of apartment buildings.
Crechale Properties filed its voluntary petition for Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. S.D. Miss. Case No. 21-50079) on Jan. 21, 2021,
listing up to $10 million in assets and up to $50 million in
liabilities. Elizabeth Crechale, manager of Crechale Properties,
signed the petition.
Judge Katharine M. Samson presides over the case.
W. Jarrett Little, Esq., at Lentz & Little, PA, serves as the
Debtor's legal counsel.
DGS REALTY: Case Summary & Seven Unsecured Creditors
----------------------------------------------------
Debtor: DGS Realty, LLC
74 Regional Drive
Concord, NH 03301
Chapter 11 Petition Date: January 24, 2022
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court
District of New Hampshire
Case No.: 22-10028
Debtor's Counsel: Eleanor Wm. Dahar, Esq.
VICTOR W. DAHAR PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
20 Merrimack Street
Manchester, NH 03101
Tel: (603) 622-6595
Fax: (603) 647-8054
Email: vdaharpa@att.net
Estimated Assets: $1 million to $10 million
Estimated Liabilities: $1 million to $10 million
The petition was signed by David H. Booth as manager.
A full-text copy of the petition containing, among other items, a
list of the Debtor's seven unsecured creditors is available for
free at PacerMonitor.com at:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/view/VESFAUA/DGS_Realty_LLC__nhbke-22-10028__0001.0.pdf?mcid=tGE4TAMA
DLR EXPRESS: Court Approves Amended Disclosure Statement
--------------------------------------------------------
Judge Scott H. Yun has entered an order approving the Amended
Disclosure Statement explaining the Plan of DLR Express, Inc.
The hearing on confirmation of the Amended Plan is set for April
21, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 302, 3420 Twelfth Street,
Riverside, CA 92501.
Feb. 17, 2022, is the deadline for any creditors or parties in
interest to file and serve any objections to confirmation of the
Amended Plan.
Feb. 17, 2022, is the deadline to return completed ballots to the
Debtor's counsel.
March 10, 2022, is the deadline for the Debtor to file and serve
the Debtor's confirmation brief and evidence, including
declarations and the summary of returned ballots, in support of
confirmation of the Amended Plan.
March 24, 2022, is the deadline for any creditors or parties in
interest to file and serve any oppositions to the debtor's
confirmation brief.
April 7, 2022, is the deadline for the Debtor file and serve a
reply to any opposition to the Debtor's confirmation brief.
Counsels for the Debtor:
Michael Jay Berger, Esq.
Sofya Davtyan, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL JAY BERGER
9454 Wilshire Boulevard, 6th Floor
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Tel: 1.310.271.6223
Fax: 1.310.271.9805
E-mail: michael.berger@bankruptcypower.com
sofya.davtyan@bankruptcypower.com
About DLR Express
DLR Express, Inc., based in Fontana, CA, filed a Chapter 11
petition (Bankr. C.D. Cal. Case No. 20-15258) on Aug. 1, 2020. The
petition was signed by Fatima Del Carmen De La Rosa, president. In
its petition, the Debtor was estimated to have $1 million to $10
million in both assets and liabilities. The Hon. Scott H. Yun
presides over the case. The LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL JAY BERGER,
serves as bankruptcy counsel to the Debtor.
EKSO BIONICS: CEO Jack Peurach Resigns; New Head Appointed
----------------------------------------------------------
Jack Peurach, who has served as Ekso Bionics Holdings, Inc.'s chief
executive officer since 2018, has informed the Company's Board of
Directors of his decision to leave the Company effective Jan. 21,
2022 to pursue other endeavors. He has also stepped down from the
Company's Board effective Jan. 21, 2022.
Effective Jan. 22, 2022, the Board has appointed Steven Sherman,
who has served as Ekso Bionics' Chairman of the Board since 2014,
to become chief executive officer, and has promoted Scott Davis,
the Company's executive vice president of Strategy and Corporate
Development, to president and chief operating officer. In
addition, the Board has designated current Board member Stanley
Stern to serve as the Board's Lead Independent Director effective
upon Mr. Sherman's commencement as chief executive officer.
"Ekso Bionics posted record revenue for the fourth quarter, which
we believe reflects continued momentum and progress with leading
inpatient rehabilitation providers across all regions, as well as
greater sales in our industrial segment," Mr. Stern said. "This
performance and the opportunities we see ahead give us confidence
in our future."
Mr. Stern continued, "Jack has led the Company through several
difficult years, guiding the Company to growth and through a very
successful financing last year, despite the impact of COVID. On
behalf of the entire Board, we thank him for his service to Ekso
Bionics. We are delighted that Steven has agreed to take on the
CEO role in addition to his service as Chairman. Steven has
demonstrated deep commitment to the Company, having invested
significant amounts of his personal capital since 2013, when he
began working with Ekso Bionics. We originally appointed Steven as
Chairman because of his extensive track record of success and
growth as an executive, chairman or board member of several
technology-based, publicly traded companies. He has been highly
engaged, and during his time as CEO, we expect the Company and our
shareholders will benefit as he leads the evolution of our strategy
to drive enhanced value for all stakeholders."
Mr. Peurach said, "After four challenging yet rewarding years as
CEO, I have accomplished the goals of putting the Company on
stronger financial footing and building good business momentum.
It's now time for the Company to have new leadership to guide it to
its next phase."
Mr. Sherman commented, "I am proud to lead Ekso Bionics as CEO and
embrace this role with a sense of urgency and optimism. I look
forward to working more directly with the Ekso Bionics management
team to evolve our strategy, expand our portfolio of products and
leverage our well established sales channel. We see many options
for growth, and our Board and industry networks will be fully
engaged to support us as we enter our next phase. We've spent the
last several months building a well-credentialed Board to expand
our access to customers, technology and business channels, and
their experience gives us further confidence in our future. I
firmly believe in the Company and its prospects, and to demonstrate
that belief and further align my performance with our shareholders,
I have requested and the Board has agreed that I will forego cash
salary as CEO in favor of compensation in shares of Ekso Bionics."
Mr. Sherman continued, "I am also proud to have Scott's support as
an executive and key part of the Company's leadership team. Scott
is a proven leader, recruited for his managerial experience and
track record in building revenues and partnerships in growth
companies, and will help lead the day to day oversight of the
Company's staff and operations."
Mr. Sherman is a seasoned entrepreneur, investor and executive, and
has served as Chairman of the Board of Directors since January
2014, including service as executive chairman from October 2018
through December 2020. Mr. Sherman is the Chairman of Imetric, an
IOT platform for consumer and enterprise. Since 1988, Mr. Sherman
has been a member of Sherman Capital Group, a merchant banking
organization with a portfolio of private and public investments.
He is the former Chairman of Purple Wave Inc., an online auction
platform. Mr. Sherman is a founder of Novatel Wireless, Inc.,
Vodavi Communications Systems Inc. and Main Street and Main Inc.
Previously, Mr. Sherman served as a director of Telit; Chairman of
Airlink Communications, Inc. until its sale to Sierra Wireless,
Inc.; Chairman of Executone Information Systems; and as a director
of Inter-Tel (Delaware) Incorporated.
Mr. Davis has served as executive vice president of Strategy and
Corporate Development since April 2021. Mr. Davis has more than
two decades of worldwide leadership success in fast growing
high-tech companies, and has proven success in helping
organizations manage change, scale, and implement transformative
strategies that lead to consistent growth and positive financial
performance. Prior to joining the Company, from December 2018
through March 2021, Mr. Davis served as chief executive officer of
Globalmatix, Inc., a disruptive IoT connected telematics solution
provider, and from January 2017 through December 2018, he served as
SVP Strategy for GetWireless, LLC, a telecommunications equipment
provider. From 2015 through 2020, he provided C-level consulting
services assisting on scalability, process improvement, business
development, M&A support and go-to-market strategy as President of
SGD Executive Services LLC. From 2007 through 2015 Mr. Davis
served as vice president of Global Sales Enterprise Solutions for
Sierra Wireless, Inc. Mr. Davis has a B.S. in Business
Administration from Bloomsburg University.
About Ekso Bionics
Ekso Bionics -- http://www.eksobionics.com-- is a developer of
exoskeleton solutions that amplify human potential by supporting or
enhancing strength, endurance and mobility across medical and
industrial applications. Founded in 2005, the Company continues to
build upon its expertise to design some of the most cutting-edge,
innovative wearable robots available on the market. The Company is
headquartered in the Bay Area and is listed on the Nasdaq
CapitalMarket under the symbol EKSO.
Ekso Bionics reported a net loss of $15.83 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2020, a net loss of $12.13 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2019, and a net loss of $26.99 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2018. As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company had $50.73
million in total assets, $11.67 million in total liabilities, and
$39.06 million in total stockholders' equity.
EVERGREEN I ASSOCIATES: Plan Exclusivity Extended Until Feb. 11
---------------------------------------------------------------
At the behest of Evergreen I Associates, LLC and its affiliates,
Judge Christine M. Gravelle of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the
District of New Jersey extended the Debtors' exclusive periods to
file and to solicit acceptances of a Chapter 11 plan through and
including February 11, 2022.
The Debtors own real property located at S. Pemberton Road and 1722
Route 38, Mt. Holly, New Jersey 08060 (the "Property"). Since the
beginning of these Cases, the Debtors' primary goal has been to
obtain replacement financing that will be used to refinance and
repay the 710 Route 38 ABL I Holdings, LLC (the "Pre-Petition
Lender") and other secured tax claims, and provide the Debtors with
the opportunity to reorganize, and ultimately develop the Property
on a post-confirmation basis.
And since the filing of the Cases, the Debtors have moved various
administrative items forward including:
(i) successfully moved for, and obtained, various forms of
"first-day" relief;
(ii) retaining counsel; and
(iii) promptly completed and filed its schedules of assets and
liabilities and statement of financial affairs.
The Debtors also appeared for and answered questions at the 341(a)
meeting and are current concerning the filing of their monthly
operating reports.
The Debtors have only been in Chapter 11 for approximately 90 days.
During this time, the Debtors have made significant, good-faith
progress towards achieving their restructuring goals in these
Chapter 11 Cases. The Debtors have filed a plan and are in the
process of obtaining financing that will repay creditors in full
and provided a redistribution to equity holders; however,
additional time is needed to accomplish these goals.
This is the Debtors' first Exclusivity Periods Extension, and
intends to use the additional time to confirm the plan. The Debtors
certainly have not used these Chapter 11 Cases to pressure
creditors or abuse the bankruptcy process. On the contrary, the
Debtors are seeking to move the Chapter 11 Cases along swiftly to a
resolution that will benefit all stakeholders.
A copy of the Debtors' Motion to extend is available at
https://bit.ly/3tVKoTM from PacerMonitor.com.
A copy of the Court's Extension Order is available at
https://bit.ly/3qVcdtK from PacerMonitor.com.
About Evergreen I Associates LLC, et al.
Evergreen I Associates LLC and its affiliates, Evergreen II
Associates LLC; Evergreen III Associates LLC; and Evergreen Plaza
Associates, LLC, are engaged in activities related to real estate.
The companies each filed a Chapter 11 petition on September 9,
2021.
In the petitions signed by Nicholas Aynilian, manager, each of
Evergreen I Associates and Evergreen II Associates estimated $1
million to $10 million in both assets and liabilities. In addition,
Evergreen III Associates listed $100,000 to $500,000 in assets and
$1 million to $10 million, while Evergreen Plaza Associates
disclosed up to $50,000 in assets and likewise $1 million to $10
million in liabilities. The Debtors' cases are jointly administered
under Evergreen I Associates (Bankr. D. N.J. Lead Case No.
21-17116).
Judge Christine M. Gravelle presides over the cases. Riker, Danzig,
Scherer, Hyland & Perretti LLP is tapped as the Debtors' counsel.
GAIA INTERACTIVE: Unsecureds Owed $6.47M to Get $25K in Plan
------------------------------------------------------------
Gaia Interactive, Inc., submitted a Third Amended Plan of
Reorganization.
Payments due under the Plan total $2,222,082 including regular
monthly payments of $25,000 to Cathay Bank during the Plan's term
and consist of the following:
* $190,131 for pre-confirmation and $257,050 for projected
post-confirmation administrative claims;
* $54,067 for priority tax claims;
* $1,720,834 in total for Cathay Bank plus interest and fees;
The Debtor does not expect any funds to remain for distribution to
general unsecured creditors except for $25,000 which Cathay Bank
has agreed as a carve out to create a pool for payment of allowed
general unsecured creditor claims.
The final Plan payment to unsecured claims is expected to be paid
not later than 8 months after the Effective Date. The final Plan
payment to priority claims is expected to be paid not later than 12
months after the Effective Date. The final Plan payment to Cathay
Bank will be 12-18 months after the Effective Date.
This Plan of Reorganization under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code
proposes to pay creditors of the Debtor from personal earnings, the
proceeds of repayment of a business loan, and then cash and
proceeds from Debtor's investment account.
Non-priority unsecured creditors holding allowed claims will
receive distributions, which the proponent of this Plan has valued
at 0 cents on the dollar.
Under the Plan, Class 3A general unsecured claims totaling
$6,472,414. Holders of allowed Class 3A general unsecured claims
will receive pro rata payments from (a) the $25,000 pool created as
a carve out from Cathay Bank's collateral within 8 months after the
Effective Date of this Plan, and (b) any net recoveries from
preference claims or other avoidance actions. Class 3A is
impaired.
Class 3B Novel Animation Claims will be subordinated by all other
claims in the case and will receive nothing under this Plan. Class
3B is impaired.
A copy of the Plan dated Jan. 19, 2021, is available at
https://bit.ly/3nJyNn5 from PacerMonitor.com.
About Gaia Interactive
Gaia Interactive, Inc. -- doing business under several names such
as Gaia Online; Gaia Online, LLC; Ravel Labs LLC and Unrave -- owns
and operates an online communities platform in Santa Clara,
California.
Gaia Interactive filed a Chapter 11 petition (Bankr. N.D. Cal. Case
No. 21-50660) on May 12, 2021. The petition was signed by James
Cao, CEO. As of the Petition Date, the Debtor disclosed $567,616
in total assets and $8,193,464 in total liabilities. Judge Stephen
L. Johnson oversees the case.
Binder & Malter, LLP, is the Debtor's counsel.
Monique D. Jewett-Brewster, Esq., at Hopkins & Carley, A Law
Corporation, represents Cathay Bank.
GARDEN VIEW: U.S. Trustee Unable to Appoint Committee
-----------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Trustee for Region 21, until further notice, will not
appoint an official committee of unsecured creditors in the Chapter
11 case of Garden View Condominium Apartments Association, Inc.,
according to court dockets.
About Garden View Condominium
Apartments Association
Miami-based Garden View Condominium Apartments Association, Inc.
filed its voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the
Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Case No. 21-21650) on Dec. 13,
2021, listing up to $500,000 in assets and up to $10 million in
liabilities. Joseph Varela, president, signed the petition.
Judge Robert A. Mark oversees the case.
John Paul Arcia, Esq., at John Paul Arcia, P.A. represents the
Debtor as legal counsel.
GENTREE LLC: Plan Disclosures Inadequate, UST Says
--------------------------------------------------
The United States Trustee for the District of Arizona (the "UST"),
filed an objection to the Disclosure Statement in Support of Plan
of Reorganization proposed by Gentree, LLC, on Dec. 9, 2021.
The U.S. Trustee points out that the information is needed
regarding Tasty's advance and future financing.
* More information is needed regarding Tasty's Advance that is
being exchanged for 80% control of the Debtor – such as, for
example the source, what due diligence was completed by Debtor's
insiders on behalf of the Estate, and how it would (or would not)
be subject to Ms. Pryor's Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or to the Final
Judgement with the SEC.
* The Debtor needs to provide additional detail as to why
Tasty's Advance (i.e., $500,000) in exchange for 80% control of the
Debtor is in the best interest of creditors, especially considering
that Debtor's current assets above outstanding liabilities appear
to be worth over $6 million dollars based on documents filed with
the Court.
* The Debtor needs to further explain why it is in the best
interest of creditors to include the provision in the Term Sheet
between Debtor and Tasty that once the Advance is converted to
equity, it is without setoff, defenses of any kind or nature (e.g.,
even willful misconduct, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, knowing
misrepresentation, or gross negligence) or subject to
disgorgement.
The U.S. Trustee further points out that the information is needed
regarding 7101 Holdings' New Value Contribution. The UST requests
additional explanation of the source and what makes up 7101
Holding's New Value Contribution of $125,000, which as detailed
will include DIP converted funds. As well, Debtor should
specifically explain how 7101 Holdings' New Value Contribution of
$125,000 is sufficient to overcome the absolute priority rule in
light of what existing equity will receive immediately if not soon
after the Effective Date under the Letter of Intent, Term Sheet,
and the Anticipated Operating Agreement.
The U.S. Trustee asserts that the information is needed regarding
how the reorganized Debtor (Tasty or an affiliate of debtor or
Tasty) intends to implement the Plan. More information is needed
as to what and how much is needed for the Reorganized Debtor to
complete the necessary renovations and improvements to the existing
restaurant, existing rooms, and overall Resort property for
operations to begin, especially if anticipated by October 2022. As
well, the debtor should explain the cost and timeline for
completing the pending condemnation litigation.
About Gentree LLC
Gentree LLC, a privately held company in Phoenix, Ariz., filed its
voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 21-05347) on July 12, 2021. Taylor
Robinson, authorized agent of 7101 Management, LLC, signed the
petition. At the time of the filing, the Debtor had between $10
million and $50 million in both assets and liabilities. Dale C.
Schian, Esq., at Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A., represents the Debtor
as legal counsel.
GENTREE LLC: Smoke Tree Says Plan Unconfirmable
-----------------------------------------------
Smoke Tree Resort, LLC, a secured creditor, filed its objection to
approval of the Disclosure Statement in support of Plan of
Reorganization proposed by Debtor dated December 9, 2021 filed by
Gentree LLC.
Smoke Tree says the Debtor's Disclosure Statement fails to contain
"adequate information" required by 11 U.S.C. Sec. 1125(a), and the
Disclosure Statement relates to a Plan of Reorganization that is,
as a matter of law, patently unconfirmable.
Smoke Tree points out that the Debtor's Disclosure Statement fails
to:
* provide sufficient financial information and detail concerning
the fundamental assumptions underlying the financial operating
projections the Debtor relied upon to reach its conclusions as well
as disclose the sources of that information; and
* include any historical operating financial information.
Smoke Tree asserts that Tasty's investment of $5,500,000 for an 80%
interest of Class A Equity would value the Reorganized Debtor at
$6,875,000. Meanwhile, the anticipated $125,000 "new value
contribution" by Debtor's owners for a 20% interest of Class A
Equity only values the Reorganized Debtor at $625,000. Remarkably,
that results in an unaccounted for valuation difference of
$6,250,000.
Smoke Tree complains that the Debtor fails to complete significant
portions of its own Disclosure Statement. Significantly, the
Disclosure Statement provides that "[t]he Plan will be funded by
the following: . . . Loans and investments by Tasty of more than
$5, 500,000 based on an agreement to be entered prior to the
hearing on confirmation." That agreement is necessary for
confirmation and yet has not been provided.
According to Smoke Tree, Debtor also states that Tasty shall
provide $5,000,000 in investment or unsecured loan proceeds, which
are to be used to renovate the Resort pursuant to a capital budget
to be mutually developed by Gentree and Tasty as described in the
Confirmation Order. Once again, the capital budget has also not
been provided.
Operations
Smoke Tree further points out that without a supporting timeline,
the Debtor baldly asserts that it "intends on reopening the Resort
in October 2022." "[T]he Reorganized Debtor will complete
necessary renovations and improvements to the existing hotel rooms,
where needed, and perform all required landscaping and maintenance
to get the Resort back into a condition to once against receive
guests." What specific renovations and improvements are
contemplated and to what level of quality? Is this based on third
party bids? If so, copies of the third party bids should be
disclosed. Will the Debtor start with the restaurant or hotel
rooms? What is the specific anticipated timeline or project
schedule? The Disclosure Statement wholly fails to describe in
detail the level, nature, and scope of the anticipated operational
and facility improvements, timing and specific cost estimates.
Moreover, Smoke Tree points out that any operational changes are
not without risk. Here, however, the proposed operational charges
are significant in nature and scope, particularly in light of the
fact that the Smoke Tree Resort has been shuttered since May 2019,
and the significant deferred maintenance of the property and the
amenities. The Debtor needs to provide specific details regarding
the potential benefits and risks of its desired operational and
facility improvements. Creditors and the Court should be able to
meaningfully evaluate the extent of the Debtor's proposed changes
and the associated risks.
Experience
According to Smoke Tree, Debtor asserts that its management team's
"experience in the development of and management of resort
properties is substantial" with "over 40 years of experience,
during diverse economic cycles, adding value to real estate by
providing solutions to development problems." Yet, as to Geneva
Management Ltd., no specific information or examples are provided
supporting the bold assertion that "the Geneva companies have
produced real estate projects in excess of $1.2 billion." It is
unclear what relevant qualifications Samuel Robinson and Taylor
Robinson possess.
Attorneys for Smoke Tree Resort, LLC:
Sean P. O'Brien, Esq.
Robert C. Williams, Esq.
GUST ROSENFELD P.L.C.
One East Washington, Suite 1600
Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2553
Tel: (602) 257-7989
Fax: (602) 254-4878
E-mail: spobrien@gustlaw.com
rwilliams@gustlaw.com
About Gentree LLC
Gentree LLC, a privately held company in Phoenix, Ariz., filed its
voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 21-05347) on July 12, 2021. Taylor
Robinson, authorized agent of 7101 Management, LLC, signed the
petition. At the time of the filing, the Debtor had between $10
million and $50 million in both assets and liabilities. Dale C.
Schian, Esq., at Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A., represents the Debtor
as legal counsel.
GFA PEANUT ASSOCIATION: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
---------------------------------------------------------
Debtor: GFA Peanut Association
PO Box 488
Camilla, GA 31730-0488
Business Description: GFA Peanut Association is a subsidiary of
GFA Peanut Company, LLC. It processes
peanuts for farmers/growers.
Chapter 11 Petition Date: January 3, 2022
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court
Middle District of Georgia
Case No.: 22-10001
Judge: Hon. Austin E. Carter
Debtor's Counsel: Robert M. Matson, Esq.
AKIN WEBSTER & MATSON, PC
544 Mulberry St Ste 400
Macon, GA 31201-8257
Email: rmatson@akin-webster.com
Estimated Assets: $500,000 to $1 million
Estimated Liabilities: $1 million to $10 million
The petition was signed by Mike Roberts, president.
The Debtor listed Bank of Camilla as its only unsecured creditor
holding a claim of $2,828,394.
A full-text copy of the petition is available for free at
PacerMonitor.com at:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/view/BJHNKAY/GFA_Peanut_Association__gambke-22-10001__0001.0.pdf?mcid=tGE4TAMA
GREIF INC: S&P Raises Issuer Credit Rating to 'BB', Outlook Stable
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised the issuer credit rating to 'BB' from
'BB-' on U.S.-based industrial packaging provider Greif Inc. The
outlook is stable.
S&P said, "At the same time, we raised the rating on the company's
senior unsecured debt to 'BB' from 'B+' and revised the recovery
rating to '4' from '5'. The '4' recovery rating indicates our
expectation for average (30%-50%; rounded estimate:40%) recovery in
the event of a payment default.
"The stable outlook reflects our expectation that continued steady
performance by Greif, together with a lower debt balance, will keep
credit measure steady over the next 12 months.
"Greif's operating performance in fiscal 2021 outpaced our
expectations, and along with debt repayments, strengthens our view
of the company's financial risk. Greif's adjusted EBITDA for fiscal
2021 increased to about $830 million on revenues of about $5.5
billion compared to about $650 million in EBITDA and $4.5 billion
in revenues in fiscal 2020. The growth was attributed to higher
volumes as well as higher prices, which offset high-cost inflation
felt throughout the industry, including for raw materials (such as
steel, resin, pulpwood, and old corrugated containers), labor,
energy, and transportation. Greif managed through the burdensome
inflationary environment through pricing, including more frequent
openers in their contracts to maintain pace with cost volatility.
Our adjusted debt leverage for Greif ended 2021 at 3.0x, down from
4.4x the previous year. We expect more moderate volume growth in
2022 and continued cost volatility, particularly for energy and
labor. Higher raw material costs will also weigh on cash flows, but
we expect some moderation through the year, and recent debt
repayments including the repayment of its euro notes) provide
additional downside cushion to the 'BB' rating.
"Greif's debt leverage is now within its target range, which
provides the company some flexibility with capital allocation.
Greif's compliance leverage ratio on Oct. 31, 2021, was 2.49x,
which is within its desired range of 2.0x-2.5x. We expect the
company to continue repaying debt, including using proceeds from
the recently divested stake in its flexible packaging joint
venture, and move closer to the lower end of the range. In our base
case, we project the company to continue pursuing bolt-on
acquisitions and growing its dividend. However, as leverage
continues to improve, we believe the company could seek larger
acquisitions like the one executed with Caraustar in 2019, but
absent such opportunities would likely target larger organic growth
investment projects and return capital to shareholders.
"The stable outlook on Greif reflects our expectation that
continued steady performance, including further recovery in its
Paper Packaging and Services segment, as well as debt repayments
will allow the company to maintain S&P's adjusted debt leverage
below 3x over the next 12 months.
"We could lower our ratings on Greif if operating performance was
well below our expectations, which, for example, could be due to a
retrenchment of demand for its products from lower industrial
activity, such that debt leverage was sustained above 4x.
"We could raise our ratings on Greif if the company continues to
make strides in its cost structure and operating performance, such
that adjusted debt leverage would fall below 2.5x on a sustained
basis, and the company demonstrates a financial policy commensurate
with a lower leverage ratio."
GRUPO AEROMEXICO: All Eight Classes Voted in Favor of Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Grupo Aeromexico, S.A.B. de C.V., informs that the Bankruptcy Court
announced that it will enter an order granting the Company's motion
to enforce a court order requiring certain parties to vote their
claims to accept the Company's Plan of Reorganization (the "Plan").
As a result, all eight classes of creditors entitled to vote on the
Plan (including the unsecured creditors of Aerovías Empresa de
Cargo, S.A. de C.V) have voted to accept the Plan, with
approximately 88% by amount of claims voting in favor. Previously,
seven of the eight classes (totaling approximately 86% by amount of
claims) had voted to accept the Plan. The Court hearing to consider
confirmation of the Plan is scheduled to begin on January 27,
2022.
Aeromexico continues working with all of its key stakeholders to
obtain Court approval of the Plan and emerge from Chapter 11 as
expeditiously as possible following the Effective Date under the
Plan. Importantly, at the Shareholders Meeting held on January 14,
2022, the Company adopted the corporate resolutions required to
effectuate the Plan, which are subject to the occurrence of the
Effective Date of the Plan.
About Grupo Aeromexico
Grupo Aeromexico, S.A.B. de C.V. (BMV: AEROMEX) --
https://www.aeromexico.com/ -- is a holding company whose
subsidiaries are engaged in commercial aviation in Mexico and the
promotion of passenger loyalty programs. Aeromexico, Mexico's
global airline, has its main hub at Terminal 2 at the Mexico City
International Airport. Its destinations network features the
United States, Canada, Central America, South America, Asia and
Europe.
Grupo Aeromexico and three of its subsidiaries sought Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead Case No. 20-11563) on June 30,
2020. In the petitions signed by CFO Ricardo Javier Sanchez Baker,
the Debtors reported consolidated assets and liabilities of $1
billion to $10 billion.
The Debtors tapped Davis Polk and Wardell LLP as their bankruptcy
counsel, KPMG Cardenas Dosal S.C. as auditor, and Rothschild & Co
US Inc. and Rothschild & Co Mexico S.A. de C.V. as financial
advisor and investment banker. White & Case LLP, Cervantes Sainz
S.C. and De la Vega & Martinez Rojas, S.C., serve as the Debtors'
special counsel. Epiq Corporate Restructuring, LLC, is the claims
and administrative agent.
The U.S. Trustee for Region 2 appointed a committee to represent
unsecured creditors on July 13, 2020. The committee is represented
by Willkie Farr & Gallagher, LLP and Morrison & Foerster, LLP.
GRUPO AEROMEXICO: Faces Drama With Unsecured Creditors
------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Martínez Garbuno of Simple Flying reports that Grupo
Aeromexico's drama with a group of unsecured creditors continues,
even as the company has announced there was majority support for
its Chapter 11 Plan and Exit Financing. It is currently waiting to
have a hearing that may propel the carrier out of the bankruptcy
proceedings. But what are these creditors arguing? Let's
investigate further.
Last week, Aeromexico announced that the solicitation of votes on
its Chapter 11 had concluded with strong creditor support. The
airline received votes on accounts of claims totaling US$2.68
billion, of which about 86% were submitted in favor. Shortly
after, Aeromexico's capital increase was also approved by
shareholders through a couple of meetings.
Currently, Aeromexico is waiting for a hearing, set to happen on
January 27, 2022. If the Court approves Aeromexico's Plan, the
airline could exit Chapter 11 shortly.
Nonetheless, a certain group of unsecured creditors is unhappy with
the current terms, and it is asking the court not to confirm the
Plan. On January 19, three different groups objected to
Aeromexico's Plan: the Invictus Group, the Ad Hoc Group of OpCo
Creditors, and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.
While it is uncertain if the creditors' claims could derail, in any
way, Aeromexico's process, the airline should face some pressure in
the next couple of weeks.
Plan Objections
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors wrote, "The Plan is
the product of a flawed process whereby the Debtors (Aeromexico)
abdicated their fiduciary duties and allowed a group of
sophisticated creditors to negotiate directly with the Debtors'
insider prepetition shareholders."
Meanwhile, the Ad Hoc Group said the plan is a perfect example of
insiders benefitting themselves through a private partnership.
Finally, Invictus believes the plan fails to comply with the
Bankruptcy Code in the United States. According to Invictus, any
Chapter 11 Plan that impairs any class of claims "must be accepted
by at least one class of claims impaired by the plan." Throughout
Aeromexico's proceedings, there was only one creditor for Air
Cargo, which was, shockingly, Invictus, and it voted to reject the
Plan.
About Grupo Aeromexico
Grupo Aeromexico, S.A.B. de C.V. (BMV: AEROMEX) --
https://www.aeromexico.com/ -- is a holding company whose
subsidiaries are engaged in commercial aviation in Mexico and the
promotion of passenger loyalty programs. Aeromexico, Mexico's
global airline, has its main hub at Terminal 2 at the Mexico City
International Airport. Its destinations network features the United
States, Canada, Central America, South America, Asia and Europe.
Grupo Aeromexico and three of its subsidiaries sought Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead Case No. 20-11563) on June 30,
2020. In the petitions signed by CFO Ricardo Javier Sanchez Baker,
the Debtors reported consolidated assets and liabilities of $1
billion to $10 billion.
The Debtors tapped Davis Polk and Wardell LLP as their bankruptcy
counsel, KPMG Cardenas Dosal S.C. as auditor, and Rothschild & Co
US Inc. and Rothschild & Co Mexico S.A. de C.V. as financial
advisor and investment banker. White & Case LLP, Cervantes Sainz
S.C. and De la Vega & Martinez Rojas, S.C., serve as the Debtors'
special counsel. Epiq Corporate Restructuring, LLC, is the claims
and administrative agent.
The U.S. Trustee for Region 2 appointed a committee to represent
unsecured creditors on July 13, 2020. The committee is represented
by Willkie Farr & Gallagher, LLP and Morrison & Foerster, LLP.
HEO INC: Asks Court to Extend Plan Exclusivity Until June 15
------------------------------------------------------------
Heo, Inc. asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District
of Georgia, Gainesville Division, to extend their exclusive periods
to file and to solicit acceptances of a Chapter 11 plan through and
including June 15, 2022, and August 15, 2022, respectively.
The Debtor has acted diligently during the initial months of this
Bankruptcy Case and will continue to do so for the remainder of the
case.
On April 16, 2021, the Debtor participated in a mediation with Jae
S. Yoo and Ah Sa Yoo, the Debtor's tenants, and other parties to
the adversary proceeding currently pending in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Western
Division, Adversary Proceeding Number 21-00032 (the "Removed
Case"). Unfortunately, the mediation and the subsequent
negotiations have not resulted in a settlement.
Since that time, the Debtor has sought to resolve the litigation
with the Yoos another way by selling the real property located at
1356 Union Avenue Memphis, Tennessee (the "Property") and thereby
satisfying and removing the Bank of Hope lien. The Court entered an
order approving the sale of the Property on August 22, 2021. The
sale closed, and the Debtor filed a Report of Sale on November 5,
2021. Debtor's counsel is now holding the proceeds of the sale in
the approximate amount of $168,632.00 in escrow.
The Debtor is still hopeful that it will be able to resolve the
remaining issues with the Yoos in this Bankruptcy Case and the
Removed Case. The Debtor requires sufficient time to resolve the
issues either through a global settlement agreement or through
litigation.
This is the Debtor's third request for an extension and will not
unfairly prejudice or pressure the Debtor's creditor constituencies
or grant the Debtor any unfair bargaining leverage. The Debtor
needs creditor support to confirm any plan, so the Debtor is in no
position to impose or pressure its creditors to accept unwelcome
plan terms.
The Debtor seeks additional time to resolve the issues with the
Yoos and other parties before it can file a plan of reorganization.
Depending on the outcome of the said issues, the Debtor anticipates
filing and confirming a plan in the coming months, and to preclude
the costly disruption and instability that would occur if competing
plans were proposed either before the plan is confirmed, or if the
plan is not confirmed, before the Debtor has a meaningful
opportunity to work with its key constituencies to put forth an
amended proposal.
A copy of the Debtor's Motion to extend is available at
https://bit.ly/3tDwNk4 from PacerMonitor.com.
About Heo, Inc.
Heo, Inc. owns and operates a commercial building located at 1356
Union Avenue Memphis, Tennessee. Heo, Inc. is wholly owned and
operated by Hyo S. Heo.
Heo, Inc. sought protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Case No. 21-20173) on February 18, 2021. In
the petition signed by Hyo Sook Heo, authorized representative, the
Debtor disclosed up to $100,000 in assets and up to $10 million in
liabilities.
Judge James R. Sacca oversees the case.
Rountree Leitman & Klein, LLC represents the Debtor as counsel.
HGL REALTY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary
---------------------------------------------
Debtor: HGL Realty LLC
1344 Utica Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11203
Business Description: The Debtor owns a commercial building.
Chapter 11 Petition Date: January 11, 2022
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court
Eastern District of New York
Case No.: 22-40039
Debtor's Counsel: Michael L. Previtio, Esq.
MICHAEL L. PREVITIO
150 Motor Parkway - Room 401
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Tel: 631-379-0837
Email: mchprev@aol.com
Total Assets: $2,150,000
Total Debts: $1,320,000
The petition was signed by Hubert Lawton as president.
The Debtor failed to include in the petition a list of its 20
largest unsecured creditors.
A full-text copy of the petition is available for free at
PacerMonitor.com at:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/view/LXNRGMI/KIRK_Bishop__nyebke-22-40039__0001.0.pdf?mcid=tGE4TAMA
HILLTOP AT DIA: Hilco Touts Successful Sale of Vacant Land
----------------------------------------------------------
Amidst unprecedented market conditions due to the coronavirus
pandemic, Hilco Real Estate, LLC (HRE) successfully advised its
client in connection with an $18,100,000 bankruptcy sale of
approximately 134± acres of vacant development land located at the
southeast corner of East 64th Avenue and Piccadilly Road in Aurora,
Colorado, just south of the Denver International Airport.
HRE'S client, Hilltop at DIA, LLC, purchased the acreage, dubbed
"Avelon," with the intent of developing a master-planned community
that would include hotels, commercial space, apartments,
greenspace, and single-family residential lots. Due to various
obstacles, ownership filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in
June of 2021 (Bankruptcy Case #21-13309-tbm District of Colorado
[Denver]. In RE Hilltop at DIA, LLC. HRE Order of Employment,
October 6, 2021).
HRE exceeded expectations through the implementation of its
customized sales solution, deep understanding of bankruptcy sales
process, and its national outreach to knowledgeable, sophisticated
buyers.
In just a 30-day period, HRE effectively marketed the property to a
universe of buyers across the country, generated offers that
included $250,000 of non-refundable earnest money from qualified
buyers and conducted a competitive virtual auction that drove the
price from a starting bid of $16,050,000 to a final high bid of
$18,100,000. This ultimately led to the property sale closing days
before the end of the 2021 calendar year. HRE's efforts resulted in
3,876 unique prospects, 110+ direct inquires and seven total offers
received in the auction itself. Furthermore, with HRE's assistance,
Hilltop at DIA, LLC was able to close the property sale transaction
a mere 37 days following the auction.
HRE's Senior Vice President Stephen Madura stated, "The success of
this auction showcases the bankruptcy expertise the HRE team
delivers to its clients. Our team closed the transaction in a swift
timeframe and exceeded the expectations of all constituents
involved with this case."
To learn more about the services HRE offers or for advisory service
for any ongoing bankruptcy, please visit HilcoRealEstate.com or
call (855) 755-2300.
About Hilco Real Estate
Hilco Real Estate ("HRE"), a Hilco Global company
(HilcoGlobal.com), is headquartered in Northbrook, Illinois (USA).
HRE is a national provider of strategic real estate disposition
services. Acting as an agent or principal, HRE uses its experience
to advise and execute strategies to assist clients in deriving the
maximum value from their real estate assets. By leveraging
multi-faceted sales strategies & techniques, aggressive
repositioning and restructuring experience, a vast and motivated
network of buyers and sellers, and substantial access to capital,
HRE exceeds expectations even in the most complex transactions.
About Hilltop at DIA
Englewood, Colo.-based Hilltop at DIA, LLC, sought protection under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Colo. Case No.
21-13309) on June 23, 2021, listing as much as $50 million in both
assets and liabilities. Judge Thomas B. McNamara oversees the
case. Onsager Fletcher Johnson, LLC, is the Debtor's legal
counsel.
IM SERVICES: U.S. Trustee Appoints Creditors' Committee
-------------------------------------------------------
Gregory Garvin, acting U.S. Trustee for Region 18, appointed an
official committee to represent unsecured creditors in the Chapter
11 case of IM Services Group, LLC.
The committee members are:
1. Nelson Mullins
c/o Gary M. Freeman
2 South Biscayne Blvd., 21st Floor
Miami, FL 33131
2. Equipmentshare.com Inc.
c/o Paul Mason
5710 Bull Run Drive
Columbia, MO 65201
3. Splicers, Inc.
c/o Danny Standefer
9575 Lake Conroe Dr.
Conroe, TX 77304
Official creditors' committees serve as fiduciaries to the general
population of creditors they represent. They may investigate the
debtor's business and financial affairs. Committees have the right
to employ legal counsel, accountants and financial advisors at a
debtor's expense.
About IM Services Group
IM Services Group, LLC is an engineering company that provides
turn-key engineering, design and construction management services
to clients in a range of industries, including the pipeline
construction industry. The company is based in Boise, Idaho.
IM Services Group filed its voluntary petition for relief under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Idaho Case No.
21-00737) on Dec. 28, 2021, listing $20,479,785 in assets and
$21,829,475 in liabilities. Judge Noah G. Hillen presides over the
case.
Matthew T. Christensen, Esq., at Johnson May represents the Debtor
as legal counsel.
INVO BIOSCIENCE: Board Approves Non-Employee Director Compensation
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board of Directors of INVO Bioscience, Inc. and the Board's
Compensation Committee approved and authorized compensation to its
non-employee directors to enable the Company to attract and retain
qualified non-employee directors and in consideration of their
service to the Company.
The Board approved the following cash payments, stock grants and
option grants under the Non-Employee Director Compensation: (1)
each non-employee director receives a cash retainer fee of $25,000,
a stock grant worth $25,000 and an option to purchase $25,000 worth
of common stock; (2) the Chairs of the Audit Committee, the
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, the Compensation
Committee, and the Marketing Committee each receive (in addition to
the compensation set forth in (1) above) an additional cash fee of
$12,500, an additional stock grant worth $5,000 and an additional
option to purchase $5,000 worth of common stock; (3) Directors
serving on the above stated committees (other than the Chair of
such committees) will receive (in addition to the compensation set
forth in (1) above) an additional cash retainer of $5,000, an
additional stock grant worth $2,000 and an additional option to
purchase $2,000 worth of common stock. The Company calculated the
amount of shares issuable with respect to the above-described stock
grants using the closing price of the Company shares of common
stock as listed on Nasdaq on Jan. 14, 2022, or $3.61. The
above-described stock options vest in equal monthly amounts over
the course of one year, have a term of 10 years and an exercise
price of $3.61. The stock grants and option grants were made under
the Corporation's 2019 Stock Incentive Plan.
On Jan. 15, 2022, the Compensation Committee and the Board approved
and authorized the following equity compensation under the Plan to
Steve Shum, CEO, Michael Campbell, COO and Andrea Goren, CFO. In
consideration of services rendered in 2021: (1) for Steve Shum an
equity bonus consisting of (A) 20,111 shares of common stock and
(B) a stock option to purchase 57,018 shares of common stock; (2)
for Michael Campbell an equity bonus consisting of (A) 15,236
shares of common stock and (B) a stock option to purchase 18,513
shares of common stock; and (3) for Andrea Goren an equity bonus
consisting of (A) 5,361 shares of common stock and (B) a stock
option to purchase 15,197 shares of common stock. The
above-described stock options vest in equal monthly amounts over
the course of three years, have a term of 10 years, and an exercise
price of $3.61.
About INVO Bioscience
Sarasota, Florida-based INVO Bioscience, Inc. --
http://invobioscience.com-- is a medical device company focused on
creating simplified, lower-cost treatments for patients diagnosed
with infertility. The Company's solution, the INVO Procedure, is a
revolutionary in vivo method of vaginal incubation that offers
patients a more natural and intimate experience. Its lead product,
the INVOcell, is a patented medical device used in infertility
treatment and is considered an Assisted Reproductive Technology
(ART).
Invo Bioscience reported a net loss of $8.35 million in 2020, a net
loss of $2.16 million in 2019, a net loss of $3.07 million in 2018,
and a net loss of $702,163 in 2017. As of June 30, 2021, the
Company had $9.93 million in total assets, $5.57 million in total
liabilities, and $4.36 million in total stockholders' equity.
ION GEOPHYSICAL: Inks Forbearance Agreement With PNC Bank
---------------------------------------------------------
ION Geophysical Corporation has entered into a Forbearance and
Fifth Amendment with PNC Bank, National Association, under its
Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated Aug. 22, 2014,
pursuant to which the bank has agreed to waive, through and
including Feb. 15, 2022, a cross default that would have occurred
under the Credit Agreement as the company has not yet paid the
scheduled interest payment due on Dec. 15, 2021, on its 8.00%
Senior Secured Second Priority Notes due 2025 prior to the
expiration of the 30-day grace period under the 2025 Notes
indenture.
In addition, ION also had entered into agreements with holders of
more than 79% of its 2025 Notes to forbear until Feb. 15, 2022 from
enforcing their rights and remedies arising as a result of ION's
failure to make the Dec. 15, 2021 interest payment due on the 2025
Notes. The forbearances are subject to the terms and conditions of
the relevant agreements with PNC and the note holders, which are
described in more detail in our current report on Form 8-K filed
with the SEC.
ION remains in continuing discussions with PNC and the holders of
its 2025 Notes and other indebtedness regarding various strategic
alternatives to strengthen its financial position and maximize
stakeholder value. These strategic alternatives include, among
others, a sale or business combination transaction or sales of
assets, any of which may be executed as part of an in-court or
out-of-court restructuring process.
Preliminary Fourth Quarter 2021 Results
ION also announced that the company expects fourth quarter 2021
revenues to be approximately $40 million, an increase of 45%
year-over-year. While expected fourth quarter 2021 revenues
declined by 10% sequentially, second half fiscal year revenues
delivered an increase of approximately 150% over the first half
year's revenues.
"Fourth quarter revenues improved year-over-year, consistent with
our expectations of momentum building from our growing data library
and maritime digitalization strategy," said Chris Usher, ION's
president and chief executive officer. "Sales of the latest phases
of our Brazil 3D reprocessing program, Picanha, illustrate the
value clients ascribe to this program which now tops over 150,000
contiguous square kilometers in the Campos and Santos basins. The
third and fully underwritten extension of our new 3D program in the
North Sea has concluded acquisition for the season. Our
traditional BasinSPAN 2D programs continue to demonstrate
resilience through sales in Africa and Brazil, despite the pullback
in exploration spending. And lastly, our software business
continues to expand into new markets. On December 17, 2021, we
announced awards for MarlinTM in the areas of simultaneous
operations and country-scale port management. Our latest contract
is for a five-year deployment of Marlin to optimize offshore
logistics in the Asia Pacific region for a supermajor."
About ION
Headquartered in Houston, Texas, ION (NYSE: IO) --
http://www.iongeo.com-- is an innovative, asset light global
technology company that delivers powerful data-driven
decision-making offerings to offshore energy, ports and defense
industries. The Company is entering a fourth industrial revolution
where technology is fundamentally changing how decisions are made.
The Company provides its services and products through two business
segments -- E&P Technology & Services and Operations Optimization.
ION Geophysical reported a net loss of $37.11 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2020, compared to a net loss of $47.21 million on
$174.68 million for the year ended Dec. 31, 2019. As of Sept. 30,
2021, the Company had $190.91 million in total assets, $256.07
million in total liabilities, and a total deficit of $65.17
million.
Houston, Texas-based Grant Thornton LLP, the Company's auditor
since 2014, issued a "going concern" qualification in its report
dated Feb. 11, 2021, citing that as of Dec. 31, 2020, the Company
had outstanding $120.6 million aggregate principal amount of its
9.125% Senior Secured Second Priority Notes, which mature on Dec.
15, 2021. The Notes, classified as current liabilities, caused the
Company's current liabilities to exceed its current assets by
$150.9 million and its total liabilities exceeds its total assets
by $71.1 million. These conditions, along with other matters,
raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as
a going concern.
* * *
As reported by the TCR on Jan. 6, 2022, S&P Global Ratings lowered
its issuer credit rating on U.S.-based marine seismic data company
ION Geophysical Corp. to 'D' from CCC'. S&P said the downgrade
reflects ION Geophysical's missed interest and principal payments
on its 8% senior secured notes due 2025 and its 9.125% unsecured
notes due 2021.
JIM'S DISPOSAL: Court Okays Disclosure and Confirms Plan
--------------------------------------------------------
Judge Brian T. Fenimore has entered an order approving the Third
Amended Disclosure Statement and confirming the Third Amended Plan
of Reorganization of Jim's Disposal Service, LLC, et al.
The Debtor shall file (1) the December Pre-Confirmation Monthly
Operating Report by Jan. 21, 2022; and (2) a Pre-Confirmation
Monthly Operating for the period Jan. 1, 2021 through the date of
the entry of this order by Feb. 21, 2022.
The Debtor shall maintain insurance with commercially reasonable
coverage on all of its assets from the date of this Order until the
Debtor makes all of the payments required under the Plan and for
such period thereafter as may be required by any existing loan
covenants or creditor requirements.
At the Confirmation Hearing, the Court addressed the Ballot Report
filed by the Debtor on Dec. 1, 2021 and concluded that the Debtor's
Ballot report erroneously stated that Classes 6 and 8 had rejected
the Plan. Based on the applicable law, Class 6 Creditor Huntington
Bank's failure to submit a ballot does not constitute a vote to
reject the Plan as the Debtor had represented; it is simply neither
an acceptance nor a rejection. And Class 8 actually voted to
accept the Plan, inasmuch as four Class 8 Creditors, with claims
totaling $1,7800,492, voted in favor of accepting the Plan, and
none voted against.
Classes 3, 4, and 5 are all impaired, and all of those Classes have
voted to accept the Plan.
The Plan does not discriminate unfairly against Class 6 because the
other classes of secured claims, Class 3, 4, and 5, are treated
substantially the same: the Plan provides for the value of each
class of creditor's collateral as of the effective date to be
amortized over five years at the applicable contract rate of
interest and paid in four years, with the first year's payment to
be made in a lump sum on the Starting Date (as that term is defined
in the Plan).
The Class 6 Claim of Huntington Bank is impaired and has not voted
to accept the Plan. Therefore, it must retain its lien in its
collateral -- a 2018 GMC Sierra, VIN # 3GTU2NEC8JG298161, valued at
$22,000 per agreement with Huntington -- and be paid that value
through the Plan, which it is. It is receiving interest of 5.99%
on its claim, which the Court finds adequately takes into account
the risk of repayment. Therefore, the Plan is fair and equitable
with respect to Class 6.
Section 1123(a)(2) requires a plan to "specify any class of claims
or interests that is not impaired under the plan." Although the
Plan does not explicitly state that Class 2 is "not impaired," it
does state that Class 2 Claims will be paid in full on the Starting
Date. Therefore, the Plan satisfies Se. 1123(a)(2).
Counsel for the Debtor:
Robert S. Baran, Esq.
CONROY BARAN
1316 Saint Louis Ave., 2nd Floor
Kansas City, MO 64101
Tel: (816) 616-5009
E-mail: rbaran@conroybaran.com
Counsel for Bank of Weston:
Erlene W. Krigel, Esq.
KRIGEL & KRIGEL, P.C.
4520 Main St., Ste. 700
Kansas City, MO 64111
Tel: (816) 756-1999
E-mail: ekrigel@krigelandkrigel.com
About Jim's Disposal Service
Jim's Disposal Service, LLC, a company that specializes in
residential waste solutions, filed a Chapter 11 petition (Bankr.
W.D. Mo. Case No. 20-40050) on Jan. 6, 2020. At the time of the
filing, the Debtor was estimated to have less than $50,000 in
assets and $1 million to $10 million in liabilities.
Judge Brian T. Fenimore oversees the case.
The Debtor tapped Mann Conroy, LLC, as its legal counsel and
Cochran Head Vick & Co., P.A., as its accountant.
JINZHENG GROUP: Gets OK to Tap Shioda, Langley & Chang as Counsel
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jinzheng Group (USA) LLC received approval from the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the Central District of California to employ Shioda,
Langley & Chang, LLP as its legal counsel.
The firm's services include:
(a) advising the Debtor regarding its powers, duties, rights
and obligations;
(b) formulating and preparing a plan of reorganization and
disclosure statement;
(c) preparing legal documents; and
(d) performing legal services as required in the Debtor's
Chapter 11 case.
The hourly rates of the firm's attorneys and staff are as follows:
Partners $450
Associates $360
Paralegals $180
The firm received a total retainer in the amount of $40,000 from LT
Global Investment on behalf of Jianqing Yang, the majority member
of the Debtor.
Christopher Langley, Esq., a partner at Shioda, Langley & Chang,
disclosed in a court filing that his firm is a "disinterested
person" as defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.
The firm can be reached through:
Gene H. Shioda, Esq.
Christopher J. Langley, Esq.
Steven P. Chang, Esq.
Shioda, Langley & Chang LLP
1063 E. Las Tunas Dr.
San Gabriel, CA 91776
Telephone: (626) 281-1232
Facsimile: (626) 281-2919
Email: ghs@slclawoffice.com
chris@slclawoffce.com
schang@slclawoffice.com
About Jinzheng Group (USA)
Jinzheng Group (USA) LLC, owner of multiple properties in Los
Angeles County, Calif., sought protection under Chapter 11 of the
Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 21-16674) on Aug. 24,
2021, listing up to $50 million in both assets and liabilities.
Judge Ernest M. Robles oversees the case.
Shioda, Langley & Chang LLP serves as the Debtor's legal counsel.
KLAUSNER LUMBER: Files Amendment to Disclosure Statement
--------------------------------------------------------
Debtor Klausner Lumber Two LLC ("KL2") and the Official Committee
of Unsecured Creditors submitted a First Amended Disclosure
Statement with respect to First Amended Chapter 11 Plan dated Jan.
18, 2022.
The key imperative for the Debtor and its professionals early in
the Chapter 11 Case was to seek to market and sell the Real
Property together with substantially all of the personal property
that was owned by the Debtor, including without limitation, certain
machinery, equipment, inventory and other assets owned by the
Debtor.
The Debtor's marketing and sale efforts were wildly successful. On
December 10, 2020, the Debtor filed a Notice of Successful Bidder
for the Sale of Substantially All of the Debtor's Assets (the
"Successful Bidder Notice"). As set forth in the Successful Bidder
Notice, although MM-H had been designated as the Stalking Horse
Bidder, after a fulsome auction process and qualifying, competing
bids, the Debtor selected Binder Beteiligungs AG, acting through
Binderholz Enfield LLC ("Binderholz") as the successful bidder,
with a cash offer of $83,400,000.00, plus assumption of liabilities
aggregating $3,287,500.00.
On January 12, 2021, the Debtor filed a Notice of Closing of Sale
of Substantially all of the Debtor's Assets to Binderholz.
Class 4 consists of CS Deficiency/Unsecured Claims. Each Holder of
the Allowed CS Deficiency/Unsecured Claims shall receive its Pro
Rata Share of an amount equal to the Net Distribution Proceeds. For
the avoidance of doubt, each Holder of the Allowed CS
Deficiency/Unsecured Claims shall receive its Pro Rata Share of the
Net Distribution Proceeds along with other Holders of Allowed
Unsecured Claims. Class 4 is Impaired.
Class 5 consists of all General Unsecured Claims. Each Holder of an
Allowed General Unsecured Claim shall receive its Pro Rata Share of
an amount equal to the Net Distribution Proceeds. For the avoidance
of doubt, each Holder of an Allowed General Unsecured Claim shall
receive its Pro Rata Share of the Net Distribution Proceeds along
with other Holders of Allowed Unsecured Claims. Class 5 is
Impaired. This Class has $26,966,352 - $41,544,831 allowed amount.
This Class will receive a distribution of 0.00% - 100% of their
allowed claims.
Class 6 consists of Klausner Group Unsecured Claims. Each Holder of
an Allowed Klausner Group Unsecured Claim shall receive its Pro
Rata Share of an amount equal to the Net Distribution Proceeds. For
the avoidance of doubt, each Holder of an Allowed Klausner Group
Unsecured Claims shall receive its Pro Rata Share of the Net
Distribution Proceeds along with other Holders of Allowed Unsecured
Claims. Class 6 is Impaired.
Class 8 consists of all Interests in the Debtor. All Interests
shall be canceled and extinguished and shall be of no further force
or effect. No Holder of Interests shall receive or retain any
property under the Plan on account of such Interest. Class 8 is
Impaired.
The Liquidating Trustee will pay all Allowed CS Carved Out Amounts
and any other distributions pursuant to the Plan initially from
funds in the Segregated Account and thereafter from any other
Liquidating Trust Assets and the earnings thereon and proceeds
thereof. The Liquidating Trustee, on behalf of the Liquidating
Trust, shall distribute such Cash in accordance with the provisions
of the Plan and the Liquidating Trust Agreement, including: (a) to
the Holders of Allowed Administrative Expense Claims and Allowed
Priority Tax Claims; (b) to Holders of Allowed Priority Claims; and
(c) to Holders of Allowed Class 3 WARN Act Settlement Claims.
The Bankruptcy Court has scheduled a hearing to consider
Confirmation of the Plan for March 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.
(Prevailing Eastern Time), in the United States Bankruptcy Court,
824 N. Market St., Wilmington, DE 19801 (the "Confirmation
Hearing").
The Bankruptcy Court has directed that objections, if any, to
Confirmation of the Plan be served and filed on or before February
21, 2022 at 4:00 p.m.
A full-text copy of the First Amended Disclosure Statement dated
Jan. 18, 2022, is available at https://bit.ly/3FSEGED from
PacerMonitor.com at no charge.
Attorneys for the Debtor:
Thomas A. Draghi
William C. Heuer
WESTERMAN BALL EDERER MILLER
ZUCKER & SHARFSTEIN, LLP
1201 RXR Plaza
Uniondale, New York 11556
Telephone: (516) 622-9200
Facsimile: (516) 622-9212
Robert J. Dehney
Eric Schwartz
Daniel B. Butz
MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP
1201 North Market Street, 16th Floor
P.O. Box 1347
Wilmington, Delaware 19899
Telephone: (302) 658-9200
Facsimile: (302) 658-3989
Attorneys for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors:
Eric M. Sutty (No. 4007)
Jonathan M. Stemerman (No. 4510)
ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP
300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 210
Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Telephone: (302) 824-7089
About Klausner Lumber Two
Klausner Lumber Two, LLC, a sawmill company in Enfield, N.C.,
sought protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr.
D. Del. Case No. 20-11518) on June 10, 2020. Robert Prusak, chief
restructuring officer, signed the petition. At the time of the
filing, the Debtor had estimated assets of between $10 million and
$50 million and liabilities of between $100 million and $500
million.
Judge Karen B. Owens oversees the case.
The Debtor has tapped Westerman Ball Ederer Miller Zucker &
Sharfstein, LLP and Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP as its
bankruptcy counsel; Fallace & Larkin, L.C. as litigation counsel;
Asgaard Capital LLC as restructuring advisor; and Cypress Holdings
LLC as investment banker.
The U.S. Trustee for Region 3 appointed a committee of unsecured
creditors in the Debtor's Chapter 11 case on June 25, 2020.
Armstrong Teasdale, LLP and EisnerAmper, LLP, serve as the
committee's legal counsel and financial advisor, respectively.
LEGACY EDUCATION: Teams Up With The Cash Flow Academy
-----------------------------------------------------
Legacy Education Alliance, Inc. has entered into a marketing and
fulfillment agreement with The Cash Flow Academy, a company
co-founded and managed by Andy Tanner. Legacy Education is a
provider of educational services and products that enable
individuals from all walks of life, regardless of their current
economic situation and educational background, to take control of
their financial freedom.
Legacy Education is committed to building relationships with
multiple subject matter experts to strengthen and broaden its
education offerings. Legacy Education is focused on providing
financial, business and career education and mentoring through its
four pillars: Legacy Elite, Legacy Building Wealth Club, Legacy
Degree and its non-profit division, Legacy Open Library.
Pursuant to the agreement, The Cash Flow Academy will offer
training and support on financial markets to Legacy Education's
customer base with products and services focused on building
knowledge, skill and confidence. Legacy Education will continue
offering training programs, products and services to cover personal
finance, entrepreneurship, and real estate in addition to investing
strategies and techniques for the financial markets.
"Combining Legacy's financial education with Andy's experience
teaching strategies for stock market trading and financial
management expands the universe of education available to our
students," Legacy CEO Barry Kostiner said. "Retail investors have
taken the stock market by storm, and we believe our collaboration
with Andy and The Cash Flow Academy will enable our customers to
continue their education and adapt to the market adjustments going
on in today's economy. Additionally, we are delighted to take this
first step to building a long-term relationship with The Cash Flow
Academy, and expect to continue to explore strategic transactions
to enhance the experience for our customers."
"I'm excited about the opportunity to build an even stronger
educational foundation for today's investors by teaming up with
Legacy Education," Tanner said. "Through The Cash Flow Academy,
I've taught hundreds of thousands of people around the globe about
the financial markets, so I have a deep understanding of the goals
and frustrations of investors. Our mission is to cut through the
jargon and complexities of stock investing, and teach strategies
for generating profits and cash flow while mitigating risk."
About Legacy Education
Cape Coral, Fla.-based, Legacy Education Alliance, Inc. --
http://www.legacyeducationalliance.com-- is a provider of
practical and value-based educational training on the topics of
personal finance, entrepreneurship, real estate investing
strategies and techniques.
As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company had $2.17 million in total
assets, $23.67 million in total liabilities, and a total
stockholders' deficit of $21.50 million.
MaloneBailey, LLP, in Houston, Texas, the Company's auditor since
2014, issued a "going concern" qualification in its report dated
April 9, 2021, citing that the Company has a net capital deficiency
and an accumulated deficit that raise substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern.
LIQUIDMETAL TECHNOLOGIES: Enters Into Golf License Agreement
------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc., through its majority owned
subsidiary, Liquidmetal Golf, has entered into a sub-license
agreement with Amorphous Technologies Japan Inc., a newly formed
Japanese entity established by Twins Corporation, a company
operating for over 20 years in the sporting goods industry with
direct access to over 3,000 global, retail establishments. ATJ
will focus its efforts on developing golf clubs utilizing
Liquidmetal's technology and selling them across the globe,
beginning in Japan where golf is one of the most popular sports in
the country.
"If you've followed our Company's history, you'll remember that we
sold Liquidmetal drivers about 20 years ago, competing against the
best brands in the world. While we have since concentrated our
efforts in other industries, we have found a partner who can focus
purely on developing the golf market, and we are delighted to work
with ATJ who shares our vision on the golf business potential
utilizing our technology," said Tony Chung, CEO of Liquidmetal.
"Our partnership with Liquidmetal presents us with an exciting new
opportunity to develop the golf market with this amazing
technology," said Ryuji Kajiwara, founder and CEO of Amorphous
Technologies Japan Inc. and Twins Corporation. "The possibilities
are endless, and we look forward to designing and developing golf
clubs that will redefine performance powered by Liquidmetal."
About Liquidmetal Technologies
Lake Forest, California-based Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. --
http://www.liquidmetal.com-- is a materials technology company
that develops and commercializes products made from amorphous
alloys. The Company's family of alloys consists of a variety of
bulk alloys and composites that utilize the advantages offered by
amorphous alloys technology. The Company designs, develops and
sells products and custom parts from bulk amorphous alloys to
customers in a wide range of industries. The Company also partners
with third-party manufacturers and licensees to develop and
commercialize Liquidmetal alloy products.
Liquidmetal reported a net loss of $2.64 million for the year ended
Dec. 31, 2020, a net loss of $7.43 million for the year ended Dec.
31, 2019, a net loss and comprehensive loss of $7.43 million for
the year ended Dec. 31, 2018, a net loss and comprehensive loss of
$8.70 million for the year ended Dec. 31, 2017, and a net loss and
comprehensive loss of $18.75 million for the year ended Dec. 31,
2016. As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company had $37.02 million in
total assets, $2.05 million in total liabilities, and $34.97
million in total shareholders' equity.
LOUISIANA CRANE: Unsecureds Will Recover 10% in Plan
----------------------------------------------------
Louisiana Crane & Construction, LLC, submitted a Second Amended
Disclosure Statement explaining its Chapter 11 Plan.
The Debtor, prior to the filing for relief in April of 2021,
solicited various parties to obtain exit financing to provide
secured creditors an opportunity to cash out. In connection with
these efforts, the Debtor has been successful in obtaining the
support of Peoples United Equipment Finance Corp. ("PUEFC") for the
acquisition of the Class 14 Claim held by De Lage Landen Financial
Services, Inc. ("DLL"), subject to and upon confirmation of the
Plan and the treatment afforded to Classes 14 and 15 thereunder.
The Debtor had been negotiating with Commercial for a second
facility. The negotiations fell apart when Commercial demanded
that the Debtor use them as a DIP lender and pay an upfront fee.
The Debtor retained Three Rivers Capital to obtain either new
financing or an equity investor. The offers received by the Debtor
were not acceptable inasmuch as the funds offered would not provide
a better return to creditors than that offered in the Plan.
The Secured Creditors are being paid based upon the "replacement
value" of their collateral with the difference between the
replacement value and the Allowed Claim of such secured creditor
being an unsecured claim.
Class 16 General Unsecured Claims are projected to recover 10%.
This is based upon an assumed Class 16 of $8,000,000 inclusive of
deficiency claims of Classes 3 through 15. The Allowed Class 16
creditors will receive their pro-rata share of the Fund which will
be funded based upon an amortization of 5 years. Creditors in
Class 16 will receive quarterly payments with the first payment 90
days after the Effective Date of the Plan. Class 16 is impaired.
The holders of interests are retaining a vast majority of their
interests.
The cash required to be distributed under the Plan to the holders
of Allowed Administrative Claims and Allowed Claims on the
Effective Date (or on such later date when such Claims become
Allowed Claims) shall be provided by (i) the Cash held by the
Debtor on the Effective Date; (ii) the Reorganized Debtor's
operations; and (iii) the contribution made by the Class 17
Members.
Counsel for the Debtor and Debtor in Possession:
Douglas S. Draper, Esq.
Leslie A. Collins, Esq.
Greta M. Brouphy, Esq.
HELLER, DRAPER & HORN, L.L.C.
650 Poydras Street, Suite 2500
New Orleans, LA 70130
Tel: (504) 299-3300
Fax: (504) 299-3399
E-mail: ddraper@hellerdraper.com
lcollins@hellerdraper.com
gbrouphy@hellerdraper.com
A copy of the Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 19, 2021, is
available at https://bit.ly/3fL6obO from PacerMonitor.com.
About Louisiana Crane
Louisiana Crane & Construction, LLC, is a Eunice, La.-based
supplier of traditional crane services and general oilfield
construction, pipeline, plant maintenance, rotating equipment, and
millwright services.
Louisiana Crane & Construction sought protection under Chapter 11
of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. W.D. La. Case No. 21-50198) on April
6, 2021. At the time of the filing, the Debtor had between $10
million and $50 million in both assets and liabilities. Judge John
W. Kolwe oversees the case. Heller, Draper & Horn, LLC is the
Debtor's legal counsel.
LTL MANAGEMENT: Court to Reinstate Talc Claimants' Committee
------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Michael Kaplan of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District
of New Jersey is set to issue an order disbanding the two official
talc claimants' committees created by the U.S. trustee overseeing
LTL Management, LLC's Chapter 11 case.
In a memorandum opinion, Judge Kaplan said he will reinstate the
original talc claimants' committee that was appointed by order of
Judge J. Craig Whitley who was initially assigned to oversee LTL
Management's case.
"It is manifestly evident that Judge Whitley's order establishes a
single official talc claimants' committee and fixes its composition
by identifying its members by name. Quite simply, the U.S.
trustee's notice of appointment is inconsistent with the order in
that it adds an additional committee and shifts membership between
the two," Judge Kaplan said.
"Thus, the notice of appointment violates law of the case doctrine
and this court is obligated to vacate same and re-establish the
force and effect of the order," the bankruptcy judge said.
Judge Kaplan clarified that he was not making any determinations as
to the appropriateness of the two committees nor is he ruling that
the Justice Department's bankruptcy watchdog is without authority
to reconstitute the original committee.
"Indeed, such actions may be warranted and prudent. However, absent
a showing of circumstances that warrant modification of an existing
order, this court cannot ignore the order nor can the U.S. trustee
use Section 1102 to overrule Judge Whitley's findings therein,"
Judge Kaplan said.
The bankruptcy judge further said his decision may disrupt the
administration of the case, including what he described as the
"on-going merry-go-round" process for hiring committee
professionals.
"In this regard, it may make sense for those affected, interested
parties to consider forming an ad hoc committee, which may come
before the court at a later date to seek recognition as an official
committee if the facts and law so warrant," the bankruptcy judge
said.
Judge Whitley, the North Carolina bankruptcy judge who was assigned
to oversee the case before it was transferred to the New Jersey
court, approved the formation of an 11-member talc claimants'
committee on Nov. 8, 2021.
On Dec. 23, 2021, Andrew Vara, the U.S. Trustee for Region 3,
reconstituted the original committee after several talc claimants
criticized the committee's composition, saying it did not
adequately represent the pool of talc claimants in the case. Mr.
Vara appointed two separate committees: (i) the official committee
of talc claimants I, which represents ovarian cancer claimants, and
(ii) the official committee of talc claimants II, which represents
mesothelioma claimants.
About LTL Management
LTL Management, LLC, is a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson (J&J),
which was formed to manage and defend thousands of talc-related
claims and oversee the operations of Royalty A&M. Royalty A&M owns
a portfolio of royalty revenue streams, including royalty revenue
streams based on third-party sales of LACTAID, MYLANTA/MYLICON and
ROGAINE products.
LTL Management filed a petition for Chapter 11 protection (Bankr.
W.D.N.C. Case No. 21-30589) on Oct. 14, 2021. The case was
transferred to New Jersey (Bankr. D. N.J. Case No. 21-30589) on
Nov. 16, 2021. The Hon. Michael B. Kaplan is the case judge. At
the time of the filing, the Debtor was estimated to have $1 billion
to $10 billion in both assets and liabilities.
The Debtor tapped Jones Day and Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A., as
bankruptcy counsel; King & Spalding, LLP and Shook, Hardy & Bacon
LLP as special counsel; McCarter & English, LLP as litigation
consultant; Bates White, LLC as financial consultant; and
AlixPartners, LLP as restructuring advisor. Epiq Corporate
Restructuring, LLC, is the claims agent.
An official committee of talc claimants was formed in the Debtor's
Chapter 11 case on Nov. 9, 2021. On Dec. 24, 2021, the U.S.
Trustee for Regions 3 and 9 reconstituted the talc claimants'
committee and appointed two separate committees: (i) the official
committee of talc claimants I, which represents ovarian cancer
claimants, and (ii) the official committee of talc claimants II,
which represents mesothelioma claimants.
The official committee of talc claimants I tapped Genova Burns LLC,
Brown Rudnick LLP, Otterbourg PC and Parkins Lee & Rubio LLP as its
legal counsel. Meanwhile, the official committee of talc claimants
II is represented by the law firms of Cooley LLP, Bailey Glasser
LLP, Waldrep Wall Babcock & Bailey PLLC, Massey & Gail LLP, and
Sherman Silverstein Kohl Rose & Podolsky P.A.
About Johnson & Johnson
Johnson & Johnson is an American multinational corporation founded
in 1886 that develops medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and
consumer packaged goods. It is the world's largest and most
broadly based healthcare company.
Johnson & Johnson is headquartered in New Brunswick, New Jersey,
the consumer division being located in Skillman, New Jersey. The
corporation includes some 250 subsidiary companies with operations
in 60 countries and products sold in over 175 countries.
The corporation had worldwide sales of $82.6 billion in 2020.
LYONS CHEVROLET: District Court Narrows AmeriCredit Suit
--------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. d/b/a GM
FINANCIAL, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD K. LYONS, Defendant, Case No.
3:19-cv-01045 (M.D. Tenn.), Plaintiff seeks summary judgment only
on Count One of its Complaint, which asserts the contractual
liability of Defendant. Plaintiff contends it is entitled to
summary judgment on Count One because Defendant "is responsible,
jointly and severally, for the obligations of Lyons Chevrolet as
its sole shareholder and president, in connection with the
floorplan lending agreements with GM Financial."
Plaintiff raises three arguments in support of its Motion for
Summary Judgment: (1) the Cash Collateral Order and Sale Order
issued by the bankruptcy court are entitled to preclusive effect
under the doctrine of res judicata, and thus, Defendant "is liable
for the indebtedness arising under the floor plan loan agreements;"
(2) Defendant has waived its prerogative to do essentially anything
to contest Plaintiff's claim against him because of positions taken
and arguments made during the bankruptcy proceedings, and (3)
alternatively, Plaintiff "is entitled to judgment as a matter of
law based upon the indisputable facts that demonstrate the amount
owed to [Plaintiff] and [Defendant's] breach under the Guaranty,
including, but not limited to, [Defendant's] failure to pay the
outstanding obligations of Lyons Chevrolet upon written demand."
Res Judicata
Judge Eli Richardson pointed out Plaintiff lays out the elements of
the doctrine of res judicata under federal common law, then
endeavors to explain why all such elements are satisfied. But in
focusing on whether claim preclusion is applicable (whether all of
its elements are satisfied), Plaintiff has neglected to take
account of what res judicata actually does when it is applicable.
Before invoking claim preclusion, Judge Richardson said Plaintiff
should have considered whether, if applicable, the doctrine could
do for Plaintiff what Plaintiff wants it to do. And what Plaintiff
wants it to do is enable it to prevail automatically as a matter of
law, or to look at it from the other direction, to preclude
Defendant as a matter of law from defeating Plaintiff's claim. But
claim preclusion serves to do neither. As is axiomatic, and as
Plaintiff specifically notes, "[claim preclusion] bars a subsequent
action" if its elements are satisfied. In other words, it acts
defensively, to preclude the so-called subsequent claim. But the
"subsequent" claim here, of course, is Plaintiff's current claim;
this current claim is the "subsequent" claim for claim-preclusion
purposes because it is a claim brought subsequent to the earlier
proceedings (here, the bankruptcy court proceedings) that
supposedly have a preclusive effect. And, to say the least,
Plaintiff does not want to preclude this claim; it wants to prevail
on this claim. Plaintiff cites no authority for the proposition
that claim preclusion can be used in this kind of "offensive," as
opposed to "defensive," manner, and it refers to claim preclusion
only as a tool for defending against (and defeating entirely) an
opposing party's claim.
Plaintiff's own statement of the elements of claim preclusion
merely highlights how its invocation of res judicata is
non-sensical, Judge Richardson said. Citing Bittinger v. Tecumseh
Prods. Co., 123 F.3d 877, 880 (6th Cir. 1997))), it identifies the
fourth element as an identity of the causes of action. But there is
no such identity here, the Court said.
The "subsequent" cause of action is Plaintiff's contractual claim
against Defendant. To say that this was not the same "cause of
action" resolved via the Bankruptcy Court Orders would be an
understatement, Judge Richardson held. The Court will simply note
that the Bankruptcy Court Orders, to the extent based on a "cause
of action" (as opposed to grounds supporting motions), involved
resolution of a cause of action of Lyons Chevrolet, not Defendant;
where two respective causes of action are possessed by opposing
sides, they hardly can be said to share the same "identity."
Asserting otherwise, Plaintiff claims that "the Bankruptcy Action
and this action are the same cause of action under [claim
preclusion] because both actions arise from the same facts," which
according to Plaintiff, means they are identical for claim
preclusion purposes.
Issue preclusion, and the policies underlying it, perhaps would
have been applicable here and assisted Plaintiff in establishing
its claims, had Plaintiff invoked issue preclusion. But Plaintiff
here did not invoke issue preclusion (whether using that term or
the term "collateral estoppel") at all, let alone set forth the
elements of collateral estoppel, let alone explain why they
preclude Defendant from prevailing on particular issues, let alone
explain why Defendant must suffer summary judgment based on the
resolution of those particular issues against Defendant, Judge
Richardson pointed out.
Accordingly, the Court declined Plaintiff's invitation to apply
claim preclusion to grant summary judgment to Plaintiff.
Waiver
Plaintiff contends Defendant has waived its prerogative to do
essentially anything to contest Plaintiff's claim against him.
Judge Richardson found the argument too cursory to carry the day
for Plaintiff. Plaintiff, he said, must provide a much more through
overview (not to say treatise) on the law of waiver. Plaintiff
needs to explain whose law of waiver (state law or federal common
law) governs the applicability of waiver to preclude defenses in a
federal court (diversity) action based on the underlying law of a
particular state. Then Plaintiff needs to explain the contours of
waiver as it applies when asserted to preclude a defendant from
defending the claims. Then Plaintiff needs to explain why waiver,
as properly understood under applicable law applies here,
considering, among other things, that the party against whom waiver
is being invoked (Defendant) was not himself (unlike Lyons
Chevrolet) a party making the admissions (in the Final Cash
Collateral Order) supposedly supporting the application of waiver.
Had Plaintiff attempted to do these things, perhaps he could have
succeeded. Doubtless, Plaintiff had available facts that would have
smoothed the road to success in this particular endeavor, including
the obvious exceedingly close relationship between Defendant (a
natural person) and Lyons Chevrolet (a legal entity). But Plaintiff
failed to do so. It left the argument far too undeveloped. True,
some arguments are slightly more skeletal than Plaintiff's argument
here, but Plaintiff's argument here indeed lacks flesh on the
bones, inasmuch as, for example, it cites only a single, unreported
bankruptcy court case and does nothing to explain why Lyons
Chevrolet's admissions necessarily effect waiver for Defendant just
as they do for Lyons Chevrolet, the Court said.
Accordingly, the Court declined Plaintiff's invitation to apply
waiver to nip in the bud any possible defense Defendant may have.
Rule 56 Argument
"That is not to say that Plaintiff cannot otherwise show that
Defendant has no valid defense and that therefore Plaintiff is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law," Judge Richardson
continued. Indeed, Plaintiff believes it can make just such a
showing even without recourse to claim preclusion or waiver, based
on an (unrestricted) review of the facts and the law. That is,
Plaintiff argues that alternatively, Plaintiff "is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law based upon the indisputable facts that
demonstrate the amount owed to [Plaintiff] and [Defendant's] breach
under the Guaranty, including, but not limited to, [Defendant's]
failure to pay the outstanding obligations of Lyons Chevrolet upon
written demand."
Judge Richardson concluded that summary judgment as to Defendant's
liability on the breach-of-contract claim will be granted, but
summary judgment as to the amount of damages owed will be denied,
finding that Defendant has created a genuine issue of material fact
as to the amount of damages owed by citing to his own declaration
wherein he avers that he has personal knowledge of Lyons
Chevrolet's business records and those records reveal different
amounts owed to Plaintiff on certain dates than the amounts
Plaintiff claims.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff's Motion will be granted in part (on the
issue of liability on Count I the breach-of-contract claim) and
denied in part (as to the amount of damages on that claim). Count
II, not being implicated in the Motion, remains pending. Plaintiff
is directed to advise the Court within a reasonable time period as
to whether it persists in pursuing Count II, or whether instead it
wishes to voluntarily dismiss Count II in light of the Court's
finding of liability on Count I.
A full-text copy of the Memorandum Opinion dated January 13, 2022,
is available at https://tinyurl.com/33evmkfw from Leagle.com.
About Lyons Chevrolet
Lyons Chevrolet Buick GMC, Inc., is a privately held Tennessee
corporation which owns and operates an automotive dealership in
Marshall County, Tennessee, selling new Chevrolet, Buick and GMC
vehicles and a variety of pre-owned vehicles. The company also
provides automotive repair service as a component of its dealership
operation.
Lyons Chevrolet Buick GMC sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. M.D.
Tenn. Case No. 19-06264) on Sept. 26, 2019 in Columbia, Tennessee.
Latham, Luna, Eden & Beaudine, LLP, served as the Debtor's
bankruptcy counsel; and Lefkovitz & Lefkovitz acted as the Debtor's
local counsel.
MALLINCKRODT PLC: K. Greathouse et al. May Proceed with Appeal
--------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Magistrate Judge Mary Pat Thynge of the United States
District Court for the District of Delaware issued a Recommendation
dated January 13, 2022, recommending that, pursuant to paragraph
2(a) Procedures to Govern Mediation of Appeals from the United
States Bankruptcy Court for this District and 28 U.S.C. Section
636(b), the matter in the case captioned KENNETH GREATHOUSE, STUART
ROSE, and LLOYD GLENN, Appellants, v. MALLINCKRODT PLC, et al.,
Appellees, C.A. No. 21-1756-LPS (D. Del.) be withdrawn from the
mandatory referral for mediation and proceed through the appellate
process of this Court.
The Chief Magistrate found that the issues involved in this case
are not amenable to mediation and mediation at this stage would not
be a productive exercise, a worthwhile use of judicial resources
nor warrant the expense of the process.
The present appeal relates to a December 1, 2021 Order by the
Honorable John T. Dorsey, which denied Appellants' Joinder seeking
a determination that the Debtors cannot reject or discharge their
post-confirmation royalty obligations to Appellants pursuant to the
Royalty Agreement under the Debtors' proposed joint plan of
reorganization. The parties were not and have not been involved in
mediation or other ADR process. Although Appellants are open to
participating in mediation, Appellees do not believe mediation
would be beneficial, and request that this matter be removed from
mandatory mediation.
The parties, however, agree to and proposal the following briefing
schedule:
-- Appellants' Opening Brief - March 1, 2022
-- Appellees' Response Brief - March 31, 2022
-- Appellants' Reply Brief - April 14, 2022
A full-text copy of the decision is available at
https://tinyurl.com/2j2s4krs from Leagle.com.
About Mallinckrodt PLC
Mallinckrodt -- http://www.mallinckrodt.com/-- is a global
business consisting of multiple wholly-owned subsidiaries that
develop, manufacture, market and distribute specialty
pharmaceutical products and therapies. The company's Specialty
Brands reportable segment's areas of focus include autoimmune and
rare diseases in specialty areas like neurology, rheumatology,
nephrology, pulmonology and ophthalmology; immunotherapy and
neonatal respiratory critical care therapies; analgesics; and
gastrointestinal products. Its Specialty Generics reportable
segment includes specialty generic drugs and active pharmaceutical
ingredients.
On Oct. 12, 2020, Mallinckrodt plc and certain of its affiliates
sought Chapter 11 protection in Delaware (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case
No. 20-12522) to seek approval of a restructuring that would
reduce
total debt by $1.3 billion and resolve opioid-related claims
against them.
Mallinckrodt plc disclosed $9,584,626,122 in assets and
$8,647,811,427 in liabilities as of Sept. 25, 2020.
Judge John T. Dorsey oversees the cases.
The Debtors tapped Latham & Watkins LLP and Richards, Layton &
Finger P.A. as their bankruptcy counsel; Arthur Cox and Wachtell,
Lipton, Rosen & Katz as corporate and finance counsel; Ropes &
Gray
LLP as litigation counsel; Torys LLP as CCAA counsel; Guggenheim
Securities LLC as investment banker; and AlixPartners LLP as
restructuring advisor. Prime Clerk, LLC, is the claims agent.
The official committee of unsecured creditors retained Cooley LLP
as its legal counsel, Robinson & Cole LLP as co-counsel, and
Dundon
Advisers LLC as its financial advisor.
On Oct. 27, 2020, the U.S. Trustee for Region 3 appointed an
official committee of opioid related claimants. The OCC tapped
Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP as its lead counsel, Cole Schotz as
Delaware co-counsel, Province Inc. as financial advisor, and
Jefferies LLC as investment banker.
A confirmation trial for the Debtors' First Amended Joint Plan of
Reorganization was set to begin Nov. 1, 2021. The Confirmation
Hearing is slated to have two phases. Phase 1 commenced the week
of Nov. 1. Phase 2 will begin on or around the week of Nov. 15,
when the Acthar Administrative Claims Hearing proceedings conclude.
NHC FOOD: Prosperum's Suit Transferred to N.D. Georgia
------------------------------------------------------
NHC Food Company Inc., d/b/a NHC Food Company, New Happy Food
Company, and You Nay Hor Khao removed the breach of contract action
captioned PROSPERUM CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC, Plaintiff, v. NHC FOOD
COMPANY INC, NEW HAPPY FOOD COMPANY, and YOU NAY HOR KHAO,
Defendants, No. 21 Civ. 7974 (PAE)(S.D.N.Y.) from the Supreme
Court, County of New York.
Soon thereafter, they moved to transfer this case to the Northern
District of Georgia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1404 and 28
U.S.C. Section 1412. They explained that each defendant has filed
for bankruptcy in Atlanta and that the contract-breach claim is
implicated in that action, because (1) plaintiff Prosperum Capital
Partners LLC d/b/a Arsenal Funding has filed a proof of claim in
the bankruptcy court for its asserted contract damages; and (2) the
fraudulent scheme that caused defendants to file for bankruptcy
also caused the alleged breach.
Prosperum filed the complaint alleging that on March 22, 2021, it
had entered into a Purchase and Sale of Future Receivables
Agreement with defendants. Prosperum agreed to purchase up to
$155,005.00 of the defendants' future accounts receivable.
Defendants agreed to have one bank account from which defendants
authorized Prosperum to debit 9% of their daily revenue until the
amount of receivables they had purchased -- $155,005 -- was paid in
full. In addition, Khao agreed to guarantee all amounts owed to
Prosperum upon a breach in performance by NHC and New Happy.
Prosperum alleged that on or about April 2, 2021, defendants
stopped making payments to Prosperum and intentionally impeded
Prosperum from making the agreed-upon withdrawals from the bank
account -- while conducting regular business operations and still
holding accounts-receivable. As alleged, defendants made payments
totaling only $41,334.64, leaving a balance owed to Prosperum of
$113,670.36.
Under the Agreement, defendants agreed to pay Prosperum's costs of
retaining collection firms and its disbursements. The agreement
calculates "Reasonable Damages" as 25% of the adjusted sold amount
of future receipts -- i.e., the balance owed -- at the time of
default. The Complaint alleged that this figure was $28,417.59. The
Complaint therefore alleged that the sum of the Reasonable Damages
and the principal balance due Prosperum was $142,087.95.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York held that the transfer factors in
combination weigh in favor of transfer of this case to the Northern
District of Georgia. The factors of convenience to the witnesses,
convenience to the parties, the locus of operative events, the
relative means of the parties, and efficiency and interests of
justice all favor transfer.
Specifically, with respect to convenience of witnesses, which Judge
Engelmayer considered as the the "single most important Section
1404(a) factor," the District Court judge pointed out that all
three defendants, and likely Danny Hall, the individual defendant's
son, the alleged fraudster who entered into the contract at issue,
are based in Georgia. Defendants have represented that "most of the
witnesses" are present in Georgia, a claim that Prosperum does not
challenge, the Court noted.
Accordingly, the Court grants defendants' motion pursuant to 28
U.S.C. Section 1404.
A full-text copy of Judge Engelmayer's Opinion & Order dated
January 13, 2022, is available at https://tinyurl.com/yc4w95b4 from
Leagle.com.
About NHC Food
Based in Forest Park, Georgia, NHC Food Company Inc., filed a
Chapter 11 Petition on June 29, 2021 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Case No.
21-54899). The Debtor's counsel is William A. Rountree, Esq., at
Rountree, Leitman & Klein, LLC, in Atlanta. At the Petition Date,
the Debtor had estimated assets of $500,000 to $1 million and
estimated liabilities of $1 million to $10 million. The petition
was signed by You Nay Khao, owner.
PIPELINE FOODS: Unsecureds to Recover 1% to 1.9% in Plan
--------------------------------------------------------
Pipeline Foods, LLC, et al., and the Official Committee of
Unsecured Creditors submitted a Plan of Liquidation and a
Disclosure Statement.
The Plan provides for the consolidation of the Debtors for Plan
purposes only and the distribution of the Debtors' assets, which
have already been liquidated or will be liquidated in the future,
to holders of allowed claims in accordance with the terms of the
Plan. The assets are largely cash, accounts receivable, fully
encumbered real estate, a small grain elevator and storage
facility, and the causes of action.
The Plan provides for the transfer of all assets into the
Liquidating Trust and the appointment of a Liquidating Trustee as a
means to implement the Plan.
The following is an overview of certain material terms of the
Plan:
* All Allowed Secured Claims (including the Rabobank Secured
Claim, the Compeer Secured Claims and the Other Secured Claims),
Allowed Section 503(b)(9) Claims, Allowed Administrative Expense
Claims, Allowed Professional Fee Claims, Allowed Priority Tax
Claims and Allowed Priority Non-Tax Claims will be paid or
otherwise satisfied in full as required by the Bankruptcy Code and
provided for in the Plan, unless otherwise agreed to by the Holders
of such Claims.
* Holders of Allowed General Unsecured Claims will receive their
Pro Rata share of (1) the Excess 503(b)(9) Atlantic Sale/Van Mol
Proceeds, if any, to the extent the Liquidating Trustee deems
advisable, with said funds being transferred to the Distribution
Account and earmarked for Allowed General Unsecured Claims if the
Liquidating Trustee declines to make said distribution; and (2) on
each Subsequent Distribution Date, to the extent the Liquidating
Trustee deems advisable, and the Final Distribution Date, subject
to the prior payment in full of any amounts owed to Rabobank in
respect of the Rabobank Liquidation Preference, all then-available
proceeds (minus all actual and anticipated Post-Effective Date
Expenses) of the Unsecured Creditor Post-Effective Date
Distributable Assets.
* As of the Effective Date, all Equity Interests of any kind
will be cancelled, and the Holders thereof will not receive or
retain any property, interest in property or consideration under
the Plan on account of such Equity Interests.
Under the Plan, Class 5 General Unsecured Claims totaling $80
million to $84 million will each receive a pro rata share of: (1)
the Excess 503(b)(9) Atlantic Sale/Van Mol Proceeds, if any, to the
extent the Liquidating Trustee deems advisable, with said funds
being transferred to the Distribution Account and earmarked for
Allowed General Unsecured Claims if the Liquidating Trustee
declines to make said distribution; and (2) on each Subsequent
Distribution Date, to the extent the Liquidating Trustee deems
advisable, and the Final Distribution Date, subject to the prior
payment in full of any amounts owed to Rabobank in respect of the
Rabobank Liquidation Preference, all then-available proceeds (minus
all actual and anticipated Post-Effective Date Expenses) of the
Unsecured Creditor Post-Effective Date Distributable Assets.
Creditors will recover 1.0% to 1.9% of their claims. Class 5 is
impaired.
Counsel for the Debtors:
Mark Minuti, Esq.
Monique B. DiSabatino, Esq.
Matthew P. Milana, Esq.
SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2300, P.O. Box 1266
Wilmington, DE 19899
Tel: (302) 421-6800
E-mail: mark.minuti@saul.com
monique.disabatino@saul.com
matthew.milana@saul.com
- and -
Michael L. Gesas, Esq.
Barry A. Chatz, Esq.
David A. Golin, Esq.
Andrew J. Rudolph
SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
161 North Clark St., Suite 4200
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Tel: (312) 876-7100
E-mail: michael.gesas@saul.com
barry.chatz@saul.com
david.golin@saul.com
andrew.rudolph@saul.com
Counsel to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors:
Kevin G. Collins, Esq.
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
1000 N. West Street, Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19801
Tel: (302) 300-3434
E-mail: kevin.collins@btlaw.com
- and -
Connie A. Lahn, Esq.
Molly N. Sigler, Esq.
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
2800 Capella Tower, 225 South Sixth St.
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Tel: (612) 333-2111
E-mail: connie.lahn@btlaw.com
molly.sigler@btlaw.com
- and -
Kevin C. Driscoll, Jr., Esq.
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
One N. Wacker Dr., Suite 4400
Chicago, IL 60606
Tel: (312) 214-8322
E-mail: Kevin.driscoll@btlaw.com
A copy of the Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 19, 2021, is
available at https://bit.ly/3Iotkdb from PacerMonitor.com.
About Pipeline Foods
Pipeline Foods, LLC -- https://www.pipelinefoods.com/ -- is the
first U.S.-based supply chain solutions company focused exclusively
on non-GMO, organic, and regenerative food and feed. It is based in
Fridley, Minn.
Pipeline Foods and its affiliates sought Chapter 11 protection
(Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No. 21-11002) on July 8, 2021. The
affiliates are Pipeline Holdings, LLC, Pipeline Foods Real Estate
Holding Company, LLC, Pipeline Foods, ULC, Pipeline Foods Southern
Cone S.R.L., and Pipeline Foods II, LLC. In the petition signed by
CRO Winston Mar, Pipeline Foods disclosed between $100 million and
$500 million in both assets and liabilities.
Judge Karen B. Owens oversees the cases.
The Debtors tapped Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr, LLP as legal
counsel; Ocean Park Securities, LLC as investment banker; Baker
Tilly US, LLP and Baker Tilly Windsor, LLP as tax consultants; and
The Finley Group, Inc. as financial advisor. Matthew Smith,
managing director at Finley Group, serves as chief restructuring
officer. Stretto is the claims, noticing and administrative
agent.
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, LLP serves as legal counsel to the
Board of Directors.
On July 22, 2021, the U.S. Trustee for Region 3 appointed an
official committee of unsecured creditors. The committee tapped
Barnes & Thornburg, LLP as its legal counsel and Dundon Advisers,
LLC as its financial advisor.
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP serves as special counsel to the
board of managers of Pipeline Holdings, LLC, one of the affiliated
debtors.
PRIMCOGENT SOLUTIONS: Hamilton Wingo Secures Appellate Ruling
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hamilton Wingo has secured a Florida appellate ruling requiring
Carolina Casualty Insurance Company to honor its insurance contract
and provide coverage for a $17.1 million arbitration award
involving Texas-based Primcogent Solutions.
The June 2021 ruling by the Florida First District Court of Appeal
closes the books on the case Carolina Casualty Insurance Company v.
John D. Spicer, a long-running dispute over Primcogent's 2011
acquisition of medical laser equipment from Santa Barbara Medical
Innovations (SBMI). Primcogent was forced to file for bankruptcy in
2013 due to the acquisition. Subsequent litigation on behalf of the
bankruptcy trustee claimed that SBMI had failed to disclose key
information about the equipment, including revenue-generating
potential and a history of customer complaints.
Prior to trial, the bankruptcy trustee offered to settle within
policy limits. The insurance company denied coverage and refused to
tender its policy limits, citing a litany of legal excuses.
After a six-day arbitration trial in 2016, an arbitration panel
awarded $17.1 million to the bankruptcy trustee. The U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the arbitration award in May
2019—issuing its opinion the same day Hamilton Wingo co-founder
Chris Hamilton argued the case.
When SBMI's insurance carrier, Carolina Casualty Insurance Company,
refused to pay the arbitration award, Hamilton Wingo filed a suit
in Florida on behalf of the bankruptcy trustee. After an extended
hearing in January 2019 on the parties' cross motions for summary
judgment, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the
trustee and denied the insurance company's motion for summary
judgment on all counts.
Despite the insurance company's efforts to appeal the lower court's
decision, further delay and evade accountability, in June 2021, the
Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the award of
coverage of the judgment in full, and lifted the discovery stay as
to the plaintiff's claims for bad faith and fraud against the
insurer—entitling the bankruptcy trustee to obtain the insurance
company's files withheld as confidential.
The insurance company was also forced to pay all policy limits to
the bankruptcy trustee. Hamilton Wingo, as the Special Counsel to
the trustee appointed by the bankruptcy court, is now actively
prosecuting claims against Carolina Casualty Insurance Company for
insurance bad faith, fraud, exemplary damages, and treble damages.
About Primcogent Solutions
Primcogent Solutions, LLC, is a supplier and distributor of medical
equipment and services in North America. Primcogent operates as
the exclusive North American (and, through its European
subsidiaries, Western European) seller or distributor of equipment
manufactured by Erchonia Corporation, pursuant to exclusive license
and supply agreements. Products sold include Erchonia's
non-invasive body-contouring laser technology trademarked under the
name Zerona(R), including the Zerona Body Laser.
Primcogent was formed in late 2011 following the acquisition of the
business of Santa Barbara Medical Innovations LLC for $18 million.
Although the Erchonia agreement gave Primcogent perpetual rights to
sell Erchonia products, Erchonia declared in March 2013 that the
agreement has been terminated due to Primcogent's alleged failure
to perform and starting that time stopped servicing Primcogent's
products. Primcogent, on the other hand, claims Erchonia has
committed fraud, breached the agreement and tortiously interfered
with Primcogent's business. Primcogent cites, among other things,
Erchonia's failure to obtain FDA clearance of Lunula, a laser
technology used to treat or cure toe fungus.
Primcogent also claims ORIX, its secured lender, is working in
concert with Erchonia. A default in the Erchonia agreement
triggered a cross-default in the credit agreement, and the secured
lender has already seized control of Primcogent's cash account and
is attempting to control warehouse inventory.
Primcogent filed a bare-bones Chapter 11 petition (Bankr. N.D. Tex.
Case No. 13-42368) in Ft. Worth, Texas, on May 20, 2013. The
petition was signed by David Boris, chairman of board of managers
of managing member. The Debtor disclosed $82,490,751 in assets and
$27,236,020 in liabilities as of the Chapter 11 filing.
Judge D. Michael Lynn presides over the case.
Attorneys at Andrews Kurth, LLP, serve as counsel to the Debtor.
Robert W. Jones, Esq., and Brian Smith, Esq., at Patton Boggs, LLP,
represent ORIX.
Ira M. Schwartz, Esq., and Lawrence D. Hirsh, Esq., at Deconcini
McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C., and J. Michael Sutherland, Esq., and
Lisa M. Lucas, Esq., at Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal,
LLP, represent Erchonia.
Looper Reed & McGraw P.C., is serving as counsel to the Official
Committee of Unsecured Creditors.
PROSPECT-WOODWARD HOME: US Trustee Says Disclosures Inadequate
--------------------------------------------------------------
William K. Harrington, the United States Trustee for Region 1,
submitted an objection to the motion of The Prospect-Woodward Home,
d/b/a Hillside Village, for entry of an order approving the
Disclosure Statement.
The U.S. Trustee points out that the Disclosures, form of ballot
and Notice of Non-Voting Status contained in the Combined Plan and
Disclosure Statement are inadequate. The Combined Plan fails to
provide adequate information about the third-party releases that
will be imposed on the Debtor's creditors. Further, the Combined
Plan does not provide for creditors to affirmatively consent to a
third-party release. Instead, the Combined Plan provides for a
limited opt-out procedure (for certain classes entitled vote). For
creditors that do not vote on the Combined Plan, the proposed
ballot provides that such creditor must affirmatively opt-out or be
bound to a third-party release. For creditors deemed to reject or
accept the Combined Plan, it appears that they are bound by the
third-party release, and an opt-out option is not included on the
notice that such creditors are to receive.
The United States Trustee further points out that affirmative
consent through an opt-in option would allow creditors to
appropriately consent to the proposed robust third-party release.
The Debtor should explain in the Combined Plan why it is forcing
some creditors to consent to a third-party release. If the Debtor
seeks to impose releases upon creditors, the Combined Plan must
make that intent clear, and provide for a means of allowing the
affected party to affirmatively consent to such releases.
About Prospect-Woodward Homes
The Prospect-Woodward Home, doing business as Hillside Village
Keene, owns and operates a licensed continuing care retirement
facility with 222 units, comprised of 141 independent living units,
43 assisted living units, 18 memory care units, and 20 licensed but
not yet opened long-term nursing care units located at 95 Wyman
Road, Keene, N.H., comprising approximately 66 acres.
On Aug. 30, 2021, Prospect-Woodward Home sought Chapter 11
protection (Bankr. D.N.H. Case No. 21-10523), listing up to $50
million in assets and up to $100 million in liabilities. Judge
Bruce A. Harwood oversees the case.
The Debtor tapped Polsinelli, PC as bankruptcy counsel; Hinckley,
Allen & Snyder, LLP as special counsel; Silverbloom Consulting, LLC
as financial consultant; and OnePoint Partners, LLC as
restructuring advisor. Toby B. Shea of OnePoint Partners serves as
the Debtor's chief restructuring officer. Donlin, Recano &
Company, Inc. is the claims and noticing agent and administrative
agent.
The U.S. Trustee for Region 1 appointed an official committee of
unsecured creditors on Sept. 9, 2021. Perkins Coie, LLP and McLane
Middleton, Professional Association serve as the committee's lead
bankruptcy counsel and local counsel, respectively.
PWM PROPERTY: Loses Fight vs. HNA Group Over N.Y. Skyscraper
------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Church of Bloomberg News reports that HNA Group has won its
fight against PWM Property Management over a bankrupt New York
skyscraper.
A unit of China's HNA Group Co. can remove its business partner as
property manager of its bankrupt Park Avenue skyscraper, a judge
ruled, handing HNA a victory in its battle for control of the
prestigious New York office tower.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Mary Walrath agreed that PWM Property
Management can hire Newmark Management to replace SL Green Realty
Corp, HNA's partner.
Last December 2021, Walrath had authorized PWM to cancel its
management contract with SL Green, but since the two sides share
decision making power on major decisions.
About PWM Property Management
PWM Property Management LLC, et al., are primarily engaged in
renting and leasing real estate properties. They own two premium
office buildings, namely 245 Park Avenue in New York City, a
prominent commercial real estate assets in Manhattan's prestigious
Park Avenue office corridor, and 181 West Madison Street in
Chicago, Illinois.
On Oct. 31, 2021, PWM Property Management LLC and its affiliates
sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No.
21-11445). PWM estimated assets and liabilities of $1 billion to
$10 billion as of the bankruptcy filing.
The cases are pending before the Honorable Judge Mary F. Walrath
and are being jointly administered for procedural purposes under
Case No. 21-11445.
The Debtors tapped White & Case LLP as restructuring counsel; Young
Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP as local counsel; and M3 Advisory
Partners, LP as restructuring advisor. Omni Agent Solutions is the
claims agent.
ROOSEVELT INN: Taps Valbridge as Real Estate Appraiser
------------------------------------------------------
Roosevelt Inn, LLC and Roosevelt Motor Inn, Inc. received approval
from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania to employ Valbridge Property Advisors to conduct an
appraisal of its real property located at 7630 East Roosevelt
Blvd., Philadelphia, Pa.
The firm will be paid a fixed fee of $5,000 for the appraisal
report, and an hourly fee of $50 to $425 for additional services,
including testimony, critique of expert report, pre-trial
preparation, and attendance at hearings or at settlement
conferences.
Richard Wolf, a partner at Valbridge, disclosed in a court filing
that his firm is a "disinterested person" as the term is defined in
Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.
The firm can be reached at:
Richard F. Wolf
Valbridge Property Advisors
2240 Venetian Court
Naples, FL 34109
Tel: (888) 981-2029/(215) 545-1900,
Email: rwolf@valbridge.com
About Roosevelt Inn and Roosevelt Motor Inn
Roosevelt Inn, LLC is a Philadelphia, Pa.-based company that
operates in the traveler accommodation industry.
Roosevelt Inn and its affiliate, Roosevelt Motor Inn, Inc., filed
voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. E.D. Penn. Lead Case No. 21-11697) on June 16, 2021.
Anthony Uzzo, manager, signed the petitions. At the time of the
filing, the Debtors had between $1 million and $10 million in both
assets and liabilities.
Judge Ashely M. Chan presides over the cases.
The Debtors tapped Karalis PC as bankruptcy counsel, Asterion Inc.
as financial advisor, A. Uzzo & Company, CPA's PC as bookkeeper,
and Blank Rome LLP and Reed Smith LLP as special counsel.
SAN LUIS & RIO: Bids for Saratoga & North Creek Due Feb. 23
-----------------------------------------------------------
Development Specialists, Inc. (DSI), is selling substantially all
of the assets of the Saratoga & North Creek Railway LLC as part of
a Court-approved liquidation plan. Interested parties must submit
a bid by Feb. 23, 2022, at 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time.
As Chapter 11 Plan Administrator, DSI founder and Executive
Chairman William A. Brandt, Jr., will be managing the proceeding in
accordance with terms and bid procedures outlined in the Order
Confirming the Plan of Liquidation entered by the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court, District of Colorado, Case No. 20-12313-TBM.
Saratoga & North Creek Railway is a "common carrier" operating
under the jurisdiction of the Federal Surface Transportation Board.
Its assets consist primarily of a real property easement and
standard-gauge railroad in New York spanning 27.9 miles. The
easement extends from the historic North Creek Railroad Station
(where Teddy Roosevelt took the Oath of Office upon being notified
of the death of President McKinley) north along the scenic banks of
the Hudson and Boreas Rivers to just northeast of Newcomb, New
York. This northernmost section of the Saratoga rail line is
commonly referred to as the Sanford Lake Branch, Tahawus Line or
the Saratoga Easement.
The sale of the Saratoga assets shall be on an "as is, where is"
basis and shall exclude cash. All the railroad's right, title and
interest in and to the Saratoga assets shall be sold free and clear
of all interests, liens, claims and encumbrances, with all liens,
claims and encumbrances to attach to the proceeds.
Brandt and his professional advisors at DSI have received a
stalking horse bid of $700,000.00 in cash, plus the assumption of
all liabilities with respect to the purchased assets arising after
the sale closing.
Parties interested in submitting a competing bid must submit an
offer to purchase the Saratoga assets on substantially the same or
better terms. The cash purchase price proposed by the first
competing bid must be equal to or exceed $750,000.00.
If the Plan Administrator receives a qualified competing bid, the
auction will be held on March 3, 2022, at the offices of Markus
Williams Young & Hunsicker, LLC in Denver. It may be convened
remotely via video conference as deemed appropriate by the Plan
Administrator or rescheduled with advance notice to all qualified
bidders.
Copies of the Plan of Liquidation, Disclosure Statements, Order
Approving the Plan and Bid Procedures, and all other related
exhibits, are available upon request by contacting the Plan
Administrator's counsel or for a fee via PACER by visiting
http://www.cob.uscourts.gov
For further inquiries, contact either William A. Brandt, Jr. at
212-425-4141 or bbrandt@DSIConsulting.com, or the Plan
Administrator's Counsel, Jennifer Salisbury from Markus Williams
Young & Hunsicker, LLC, at 303-830-0800 or
jsalisbury@markuswilliams.com.
About DSI
Development Specialists, Inc. (DSI) --
http://www.dsiconsulting.com/-- is one of the leading providers of
management consulting and financial advisory services, including
turnaround consulting, financial restructuring, litigation support,
fiduciary services and forensic accounting. Our clients include
business owners, private-equity investors, corporate boards,
financial institutions, secured lenders, bondholders and unsecured
creditors. For almost 48 years, DSI has been guided by a single
objective: maximizing value for all stakeholders. With our highly
skilled and diverse team of professionals, offices in the U.S. and
international affiliates and an unparalleled range of experience,
DSI has built a solid reputation as an industry leader.
About San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad
San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad, Inc., operates the San Luis & Rio
Grande Railroad.
On Oct. 16, 2019, an involuntary Chapter 11 petition was filed
against San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad by creditors, Ralco LLC,
South Middle Creek Road Association and The San Luis Central
Railroad Co. (Bankr. D. Colo. Case No. 19-18905). The petitioning
creditors are represented by Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schrec and
Graves Dougherty Hearon & Moody.
Judge Thomas B. McNamara oversees the case.
Williams A. Brandt Jr. was appointed as Chapter 11 trustee for San
Luis & Rio Grande Railroad.
The trustee tapped Markus Williams Young & Hunsicker LLC as
bankruptcy counsel, and Fletcher & Sippel LLC and Hall & Evans P.C.
as special counsel. Development Specialists, Inc. and D'Almeida
Consulting, LLC serve as the trustee's accountant and financial
consultant, respectively.
SANTA FE ARCHDIOCESE: Insurers Push to Settle Abuse Claims
----------------------------------------------------------
Colleen Heild of Albuquerque Journal reports that the insurers of
the Santa Fe Archdiocese pushed to settle the abuse claims.
As the Archdiocese of Santa Fe bankruptcy reorganization enters its
fourth year without resolution, pressure is building for the
church's insurance carriers to foot a greater share of the payout
to nearly 400 child sexual abuse survivors.
The Archdiocese and claimants alleging abuse by priests and other
clergy came to a tentative agreement last year on what the
Archdiocese would pay, but insurance companies' contributions
remain an issue.
Now attorneys for the claimants are preparing to ask U.S.
Bankruptcy Judge David Thuma to permit state lawsuits or claims put
on hold by the bankruptcy filing to go forward – a move that
could conceivably allow juries to assess damages to individual
survivors after public trials and prove much more costly for the
insurance companies.
The Archdiocese itself plans to file a legal action as early as
Monday, January 17, 2022. asking a judge to settle undisclosed
questions involving the relationship "between the Archdiocese and
its insurance carriers," an Archdiocese attorney said Friday during
a hearing in Albuquerque.
A recent three-day mediation that involved the insurance companies,
Archdiocese and claimants, led by a nationally recognized mediator,
was positive and should continue, said Archdiocese attorney Thomas
Walker, referring to mediator Paul Van Osselaer of Texas.
"I'm hopeful and I know everyone gets tired of hearing that word as
time drags on," Walker said. "But I'm encouraged."
Jim Stang, a California attorney who represents survivors,
countered during Friday's, January 21, 2022, hearing that while
some progress had been made, "we are very far from resolution of
this case in terms of the dollars involved."
He noted that in the recent USA Gymnastics bankruptcy settlement
involving sexual abuse claims against a former team doctor,
survivors on average will receive $800,000 each. In recent days,
the University of Michigan announced a $490 million settlement of
sexual abuse claims involving a former school doctor in which
survivors will be paid an average of more than $400,000 each, Stang
added.
"We look to settlements from around the country for guidance as to
what the fair value of what these (Archdiocese) abuse claims would
total," Stang said. "If they're not paying attention to the trends
going on around the country, they're making a serious mistake."
There has been no disclosure of what the Archdiocese is willing to
contribute, or what insurance companies are offering.
And Rob Charles, a Tucson attorney representing Archdiocese
parishes, said that citing such multimillion dollar payouts might
not sit well with New Mexico parishes that have committed "probably
more than they can" toward the Archdiocese's financial settlement.
The Archdiocese has had numerous insurance carriers since claims of
sexual abuse by priests and other clergy surfaced decades ago and
so far has paid $52 million, including insurance proceeds and its
own money, to settle about 300 cases out of court, according to The
Associated Press. That would average out to about $175,000 per
victim.
The Archdiocese filed for bankruptcy protection in 2018 in part so
it didn't have to face exposure from individual state lawsuits
alleging clergy sexual abuse.
One issue Friday, January 21, 2022, was whether the upcoming
Archdiocese legal action involving the insurance issues will be
sealed.
Prior court filings, orders and hearings have been sealed at the
Archdiocese's request to ensure its contracts with insurance
carriers, which had confidentiality clauses, weren't breached.
Thuma, while not immediately ruling on that question, said Friday,
January 21, 2022, "My prejudice is to not seal things, especially
in a case like this where there’s public interest and the public
has a right to know…"
Merit Bennett, a Santa Fe attorney, told the judge, "The words
'under seal' in this type of matter concern me because I filed my
first (child sexual abuse) lawsuit against the Archdiocese in 1994
and ever since then the words 'under seal' seem to perpetuate the
fact that all of the abuse was under seal for many, many
generations."
If the insurance case is sealed, Bennett said, "The public is going
to basically say, 'Well, this is more of the same.'"
Stang added, "These insurance policies, one might say, are the most
important assets of this (Archdiocese) estate and to do this behind
closed doors is not appropriate."
About the Archdiocese of Santa Fe
The Roman Catholic Church of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe --
https://www.archdiosf.org/ -- is an ecclesiastical territory or
diocese of the southwestern region of the United States in the
state of New Mexico. At present, the Archdiocese of Santa Fe covers
an area of 61,142 square miles. There are 93 parish seats and 226
active missions throughout this area.
The Archdiocese of Santa Fe sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr.
D.N.M. Case No. 18-13027) on Dec. 3, 2018, to deal with child abuse
claims. It reported total assets of $49,184,579 and total
liabilities of $3,700,000 as of the bankruptcy filing. Judge David
T. Thuma oversees the case.
The archdiocese tapped Elsaesser Anderson, Chtd. and Walker &
Associates, P.C., as bankruptcy counsel, Stelzner, Winter,
Warburton, Flores, Sanchez & Dawes, P.A., as special counsel, and
REDW LLC as accountant.
SARATOGA AND NORTH CREEK: Court Confirms 2nd Amended Plan
---------------------------------------------------------
Judge Thomas B. McNamara of the United States Bankruptcy Court for
the District of Colorado issued a memorandum opinion and order
confirming the Chapter 11 plan in the bankruptcy case of Saratoga
and North Creek Railway, LLC.
Saratoga and North Creek Railway, LLC is a "common carrier" that
filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.
After more than a year in its insolvency proceeding, the Debtor
filed a Chapter 11 plan. The centerpiece of the Debtor's Second
Amended Plan is a proposed sale of the Debtor's largest non-cash
asset: a real property easement created by virtue of a federal
stipulated judgment, known as the "Saratoga Easement", along with
29.70 miles of rail tracks extending from North Creek, New York,
northward to the Tahawus Mine located northeast of the Town of
Newcomb, New York. The Debtor proposes to sell the Saratoga
Easement to a stalking horse bidder under the terms of an asset
purchase agreement appended to the Second Amended Plan but subject
to the terms of bid procedures which contemplate a potential
auction. The bid procedures require auction participants to agree
to assume "the common carrier obligation to preserve the future
operation of rail service on the Saratoga Easement." And the
proposed acquisition is subject to approval (or exemption) by the
Surface Transportation Board.
There were several objections submitted to the Second Amended Plan
but only one remains: the joint objection of the State of New York,
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and
the New York State Olympic Regional Development Authority. New York
contests confirmation on the basis of Sections 1129(a)(1), (3), and
(7). The main thrust of New York's position is that the Debtor
should abandon its stalking horse bidder and change the proposed
bid procedures so that even bidders who do not agree to assume "the
common carrier obligation to preserve the future operation of rail
service on the Saratoga Easement" can participate. New York has a
buyer in mind who appears interested in a "rails-to-trails"
approach whereby the Saratoga Easement and rail line would be
converted to a hiking area. The Debtor contends that such proposal
is not viable and may lead to further delay.
The Court conducted a contested confirmation hearing and received
evidence presented by the Debtor and New York. With the benefit of
that evidence and extensive legal argument, the Court ultimately
concludes that the Debtor satisfied all of its burdens for
confirmation of the Second Amended Plan under Sections 1129(a) and
(b). The Debtor's proposal is a cogent and thoughtful attempt to
unlock value for the benefit of creditors who have voted
overwhelmingly in favor of the Second Amended Plan. And,
ultimately, the Second Amended Plan may result in an auction
generating even more consideration.
After approximately a year of active marketing, in August 2021, the
Debtor entered into an arm's-length Asset Purchase Agreement with
Revolution Rail. Under the APA, the Debtor agreed to sell to
Revolution Rail all rail lines located on the Saratoga Easement,
along with all associated real property, personal property, and
facilities, including: roadbeds; tracks; bridges; culverts; signals
and communications facilities; dispatching systems and equipment;
stations; depots; yards; shops; parking and storage facilities;
buildings and structures; facilities and fixtures trackage rights
agreements; unexpired real and personal property leases; inventory;
intellectual property; the name "Saratoga and North Creek Railway,
LLC" (including the common carrier mark SNC); rights under the "Car
Mark Use Agreement" with CAI Rail; and rights under the "Agreement
for Use of Track" with Revolution Adirondack.
In other words, to generalize, the Debtor agreed to sell all of its
Assets except cash and causes of action. Revolution Rail agreed to
pay $700,000.00 to purchase the Assets. The APA is subject to
approval by the Court and approval by the STB (or an exemption).
Revolution Rail made a deposit of $25,000.00 in connection with the
proposed transaction. The APA is also subject to "other offers
presented to the [Debtor] solely in accordance with the Bid
Procedures [set forth in the Second Amended Plan]." So, in
bankruptcy vernacular, the APA is a "stalking horse" bid.
According to the Court, William A. Brandt, Jr. (the Chapter 11
Trustee of the sole member of the Debtor), credibly and repeatedly
testified that the Second Amended Plan (including the APA and Bid
Procedures) represents his best business judgment and will provide
the greatest return to the Debtor's creditors on a prompt basis.
The Court finds that there is no evidence that the Debtor entered
into the APA with an improper or bad motive, nor that there was any
collusion.
The Second Amended Plan is built on the foundation of the APA. In
the Second Amended Plan, the Debtor states that it seeks approval
of the sale of the Assets to Revolution Rail "or to a competing
bidder that submits a higher and better offer in accordance with
the Bidding Procedures" set forth the Second Amended Plan.
The main thrust of the New Objection focuses on three discrete but
related parts of the Bid Procedures that New York contests:
1. Paragraph 6.1(e)(1)(f) of the Initial Plan provided:
Public Interest. Each and every competing Bid must indicate
that the potential purchaser shall protect the public interest as
set forth in 11 U.S.C. Section 1165 by preserving the operation of
rail service on the rail lines.
By the Second Amended Plan, the Debtor modified such text to state
as follows:
Public Interest. Each and every competing Bid must indicate
that the potential purchaser shall protect the public interest by
assuming the common carrier obligation to preserve the future
operation of rail service on the Saratoga Easement.
2. Paragraph 6.1(g) of the Initial Plan provided:
The determination of which Qualified Bid constitutes the
Baseline Bid and which Qualified Bid constitutes a Successful Bid
shall take into account any factors the Plan Administrator
reasonably deems relevant to the value of the Qualified Bid to the
Debtor's estate, including, among other things: (a) the total
consideration; (b) the public interest consistent with 11 U.S.C.
Section 1165; and (c) the likelihood of the Bidder's ability to
close a transaction, the conditions thereto, and the timing
thereof.
By the Second Amended Plan, the Debtor modified such text to state
as follows:
The determination of which Qualified Bid constitutes the
Baseline Bid and which Qualified Bid constitutes a Successful Bid
shall take into account any factors the Plan Administrator
reasonably deems relevant to the value of the Qualified Bid to the
Debtor's estate, including, among other things: (a) the total
consideration; (b) the public interest as defined by assuming the
common carrier obligation to preserve the future operation of rail
service on the Saratoga Easement; and (c) the likelihood of the
Bidder's ability to close a transaction, the conditions thereto,
and the timing thereof.
3. Paragraph 6.1(g)(4)(1) of the Initial Plan provided:
When determining the highest or otherwise best Qualified Bid,
as compared to other Qualified Bids, the Plan Administrator may
consider the following factors in addition to any other factors
that the Plan Administrator deems appropriate: (i) the amount and
nature of the total consideration; (ii) the likelihood of the
Bidder's ability to close a transaction, the timing thereof; (iii)
such Bidder's connections with the Debtor; (iv) the Bidder's
ability to continue and maintain operations of the Debtor, and (v)
the public interest as defined in 11 U.S.C. Section 1165.
By the Second Amended Plan, the Debtor modified such text to state
as follows:
When determining the highest or otherwise best Qualified Bid,
as compared to other Qualified Bids, the Plan Administrator may
consider the following factors in addition to any other factors
that the Plan Administrator deems appropriate: (i) the amount and
nature of the total consideration; (ii) the likelihood of the
Bidder's ability to close a transaction, the timing thereof; (iii)
such Bidder's connections with the Debtor; (iv) the Bidder's
ability to continue and maintain operations of the Debtor, and (v)
the public interest as defined by assuming the common carrier
obligation to preserve the future operation of rail service on the
Saratoga Easement.
As is apparent from the foregoing three provisions and changes, the
Debtor eliminated all references to Section 1165 (a statute
applicable only in Chapter 11 Subchapter IV railroad
reorganizations) and instead substituted language referring to the
"common carrier obligation to preserve the future operation of rail
service on the Saratoga Easement," Judge McNamara pointed out.
With respect to voting on the Plan, Class 3 General Unsecured
Creditors voted rather overwhelmingly in favor of confirmation of
the Second Amended Plan. Of the 10 Class 3 General Unsecured
Creditors who voted, nine voted in favor. Only the NY Olympic
Authority voted to reject. In terms of the dollar amount of voting
claims, the ten unsecured creditors voting on the Second Amended
Plan hold claims against the Debtor totaling $5,290,372.31, while
the NY Olympic Authority holds a claim for the nominal amount of
$2,821.00 The nine accepting votes represent 99.95% ($5,287,551.31)
of the dollar amount of voting Class 3 Unsecured Claims. The only
rejecting vote represents only 0.05% of the dollar amount of voting
Class 3 Unsecured Claims.
A full-text copy of the decision dated January 13, 2022, is
available at https://tinyurl.com/2p95wtka from Leagle.com.
About Saratoga and North Creek Railway
Saratoga and North Creek Railway, LLC, a privately held company in
the rail transportation industry, filed a voluntary Chapter 11
(Bankr. D. Col. Case No. 20-12313) on March 30, 2020. In the
petition signed by William A. Brandt, Jr., Chapter 11 trustee of
San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad, Inc., Debtor was estimated to have
$1 million to $10 million in both assets and liabilities. Judge
Thomas B. Mcnamara oversees the case. The Debtor tapped Markus
Williams Young & Hunsicker LLC as its legal counsel, and
Development Specialists, Inc. as its accountant.
SAVI TECHNOLOGY: Unsecureds Will Get 25% of Claims in 3 Years
-------------------------------------------------------------
Savi Technology, Inc., submitted an Amended Disclosure Statement to
the Amended Plan of Reorganization dated Jan. 18, 2022.
The Debtor is a pioneer, innovator and inventor of technologies and
products that leverage sensors to improve operational analysis,
efficiency and insights. Harnessing the power of cellular and
satellite technology, the Debtor's products provide superior,
low-cost internet of things (IoT) sensors assuring state of the art
intransit and asset visibility.
On November 21, 2019, Savi filed a complaint captioned Savi
Technology v. DKP MFG, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01482, in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia,
Alexandria Division. Mediation occurred on December 13, 2021 and
resulted in a successful resolution of DKP's and the Debtor's
claims. The parties have filed a joint motion under Fed. R. Bankr.
P. 9019 seeking Bankruptcy Court approval of the settlement which
requires in part that DKP have a $1 million allowed unsecured claim
and support the Debtor's Plan.
The Debtor's liabilities as of the Petition Date were as follows:
Secured Claims - $8,249,054.11; Priority Unsecured Claims -
$119,765.00; and Nonpriority Unsecured Claims - $2,788,980.27.
As of the Petition Date, the Debtor had accounts receivable in the
amount of $943,336.32. The Debtor's schedules reflect finished
goods inventory in the amount of $2,261,002.15 and inventory and
equipment that was held by DKP in the amount of $2,450,000.00. Some
of that inventory has been used since the Petition Date. The
schedules also reflect a value of $1,800,000.00 for the Debtor's
intellectual property, based upon an appraisal from several years
ago. The Debtor does not believe that reflects the current value of
the intellectual property (likely far less).
The Amended Plan will treat claims as followed:
* Class 1 Claim. Each Priority Claim will be paid in full from
the Debtor's cash on the Effective Date. The Debtor believes there
are employee priority and tax claims in the aggregate amount of
$119,765.00. Pursuant to sections 1124 and 1126(f) of the
Bankruptcy Code, Class 1 is an unimpaired Class and conclusively
presumed to have accepted this Plan.
* Class 2 Claim (Eastward Fund Management, LLC). Commencing in
April 2022, the Class 2 claim will be paid in full in equal monthly
payments over 18 months with interest at the rate of 7% per annum.
The holder of the Class 2 Claim is Impaired.
* Class 3 Claim (Charles Meyer). The holder of the Class 3
claim will waive $259,921.00 of his secured claim (the full claim
amount prior to this discount was $1,299,605.00 in exchange for a
pro rata share of the membership interests in the reorganized
Debtor. Commencing three months after entry of the Confirmation
Order, the remainder of this secured claim will be paid at the
annual interest rate of 4% in quarterly payments over 5 years with
a final payment upon maturity.
* Class 4 Claim (Dana Frix). The holder of the Class 4 claim
will waive $69,312.00 of his secured claim (the full claim amount
prior to this discount was $346,562.00 in exchange for a pro rata
share of the membership interests in the reorganized Debtor.
Commencing three months after entry of the Confirmation Order, the
remainder of this secured claim will be paid at the annual interest
rate of 4% in quarterly payments over 5 years with a final payment
upon maturity.
* Class 5 Claim (Dennis Shanahan). The holder of the Class 5
claim will waive $150,604.00 of his secured claim (the full claim
amount prior to this discount was $753,020 in exchange for a pro
rata share of the membership interests in the reorganized Debtor.
Commencing three months after entry of the Confirmation Order, the
remainder of this secured claim will be paid at the annual interest
rate of 4% in quarterly payments over 5 years with a final payment
upon maturity.
* Class 6 Claim (Sean P. McGuinness 1995 Trust and Sean P.
McGuinness GST Exempt Family Trust). The holder of the Class 6
claim will waive $190,609.00 of the secured claim (the full claim
amount prior to this discount was $953,044.00 in exchange for a pro
rata share of the membership interests in the reorganized Debtor.
Commencing three months after entry of the Confirmation Order, the
remainder of this secured claim will be paid at the annual interest
rate of 4% in quarterly payments over 5 years with a final payment
upon maturity.
* Class 8 Claim (J. Richard Carlson). The holder of the Class
8 claim will waive $45,977.00 of his secured claim (the full claim
amount prior to this discount was $229,885.00 in exchange for a pro
rata share of the membership interests in the reorganized Debtor.
Commencing three months after entry of the Confirmation Order, the
remainder of this secured claim will be paid at the annual interest
rate of 4% in quarterly payments over 5 years with a final payment
upon maturity.
* Class 9 Claim (Small Business Administration). Commencing in
April 2022, the Class 9 claim will be paid at the contract interest
rate the amount of $731 per month until paid. The holder of the
Class 9 Claim is Impaired.
* Class 10 Claims (Allowed Unsecured Claims). The holders of
General Unsecured Claims will paid a pro rata share of $510,906.00
over three years. The Debtor estimates this will equate to twenty
five percent (25%) of each Allowed Claim over three years.
The Debtor shall continue to exist with the new equity interest
holders as set forth previously. After confirmation, the operating
agreement shall be amended to reflect the revised membership
interests. The officers and directors shall remain in their
positions post-confirmation. The equity owners in the reorganized
Debtor shall be: Charles Meyer (36.3%); Dana Frix (9.7%); Dennis
Shanahan (21.00%); Sean P. McGuinness 1995 Trust and Sean P.
McGuinness GST Exempt Family Trust (26.6%); and J. Richard Carlson
(6.4%).
The funds necessary to pay all Allowed Claims shall be derived from
the Debtor's operations.
A full-text copy of the Amended Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 18,
2022, is available at https://bit.ly/3fQK1BO from PacerMonitor.com
at no charge.
Counsel for the Debtor:
Benjamin P. Smith, Esq.
Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker, P.A.
12505 Park Potomac Avenue, Suite 600
Potomac, MD 20854
Tel.: (301) 230-5241
Fax: (301) 230-2891
Email: bsmith@shulmanrogers.com
About Savi Technology
Savi Technology, Inc. -- https://www.savi.com/ -- is an innovator
in supply chain visibility and sensor technology, providing
real-time information about the location, condition and security of
in-transit goods and assets. The company sought protection under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. E.D. Va. Case No.
21-11369) on August 4, 2021.
On the Petition Date, the Debtor estimated $1 million to $10
million in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities.
The petition was signed by Rosemary Johnston as acting president
and CEO.
Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker, P.A., serves the Debtor's
counsel.
Eastward Fund Management, LLC, as lender, is represented by Richard
E. Hagerty, Esq. at Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP.
SEADRILL NEW FINANCE: Exits Chapter 11 as Paratus Energy
--------------------------------------------------------
Seadrill Limited's Seadrill New Finance Limited (to be renamed
Paratus Energy Services Ltd.) (the "Issuer") announced Jan. 22,
2022, that it has emerged from chapter 11 after successfully
completing its pre-packaged restructuring pursuant to its chapter
11 plan of reorganization (the "Plan"). As previously announced,
the Plan was confirmed by the United States Bankruptcy Court for
the Southern District of Texas on January 12, 2022. All conditions
precedent to the restructuring contemplated by the Plan have been
satisfied or otherwise waived. Seadrill New Finance Limited will
shortly be renamed Paratus Energy Services Ltd.
In accordance with the Plan, post emergence the board of directors
of the Issuer shall consist of between three and five members, up
to four of which shall be appointed by the Issuer's noteholders,
with the remaining director to be appointed by Seadrill. As such,
a newly constituted board of directors of the Issuer was appointed
today, consisting of Mei Mei Chow, Jim LaChance, Matt Lyne, and
James Ayers. Sergio Delgado will initially act as an observer.
The Plan, which received support from an overwhelming majority of
existing stakeholders, provides the Issuer with financial and
strategic flexibility and stability. Benefitting from both the new
ownership structure and the continuity provided by the Seadrill
group, the Issuer expects to continue to focus on maximizing value
for all stakeholders from its portfolio of investments including
the Seabras Sapura JV and the SeaMex group.
As noted in previous announcements, the key terms of the Plan
included:
-- the release by the holders of the Issuer's pre-existing 12.0%
Senior Secured Notes due 2025 (the "Noteholders" and the "Notes",
respectively) of all existing guarantees and security and claims
(if any) with respect to Seadrill and its subsidiaries (excluding
the Issuer and certain of its subsidiaries);
-- the Noteholders receiving 65% of pro forma equity in the
Issuer, with Seadrill Investment Holding Company (a subsidiary of
Seadrill) retaining the remaining 35% of pro forma equity in the
Issuer, effecting a separation of the Issuer and its subsidiaries
(including the Seabras Sapura assets and the SeaMex group) from the
consolidated Seadrill group;
-- the issuance of new notes pro rata to Noteholders on amended
terms including:
* total amount of reinstated new notes: $620,148,899;
* maturity date: July 15, 2026;
* interest: either (a) 9.0%, consisting of (i) 3.00% cash
interest plus (ii) 6.00% PIK interest, or (b) 10.0% PIK, in each
case payable quarterly;
* call protection: redemption price:
- prior to July 15, 2022: 105%;
- on or after July 15, 2022: 102%; and
- on July 15, 2023 and thereafter: 100%;
-- the Noteholders will have a first priority right to fund any
additional liquidity needs of the Issuer or its affiliates; and
-- Seadrill or its subsidiaries will continue to provide certain
management services to the Issuer's group.
The Plan also provided for the satisfaction of all trade, customer,
and other non-funded debt claims in full in the ordinary course of
business. Copies of the key chapter 11 documents are available at
the following website:
https://cases.primeclerk.com/SeadrillNewFinance/. If any
Noteholders entitled to receive shares pursuant to the Plan did not
submit the relevant documentation by the relevant deadlines,
details will be available from tomorrow at the following link
https://cases.primeclerk.com/SeadrillNewFinance/Home-DocketInfo?DocAttribute=7040&DocAttrName=NOTICEOFDISTRIBUTION_Q&MenuID=17868
with further information on how to claim your equity distribution.
Alternatively, please contact Prime Clerk at
SeadrillNFBallots@primeclerk.com. The final deadline for a
Noteholder to claim the equity distribution it may be entitled to
under the Plan is 365 days from the Jan. 20 effective date.
Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Slaughter and May served as legal advisors
to the Issuer in connection with the restructuring. Akin Gump
Strauss Hauer & Feld served as legal advisors to an ad hoc group of
the Noteholders (the "Ad Hoc Group"), and Ducera Partners LLC
served as the Ad Hoc Group's financial adviser.
This announcement relates to Seadrill New Finance Limited and is
not expected to impact the recoveries existing shareholders of
Seadrill Limited will receive under the Seadrill Limited Plan.
Consummation of the Seadrill Limited Plan is subject to a number of
customary terms and conditions, including court approval, which was
obtained on October 26, 2021.
About Seadrill Ltd.
Seadrill Limited (OSE: SDRL, OTCQX: SDRLF) --
http://www.seapdrill.com/-- is a deepwater drilling contractor
providing drilling services to the oil and gas industry. As of
March 31, 2018, it had a fleet of over 35 offshore drilling units
that include 12 semi-submersible rigs, 7 drillships, and 16 jack-up
rigs.
On Sept. 12, 2017, Seadrill Limited sought Chapter 11 protection
after reaching terms of a reorganization plan that would
restructure $8 billion of funded debt. It emerged from bankruptcy
in July 2018.
Demand for exploration and drilling has fallen further during the
COVID-19 pandemic as oil firms seek to preserve cash, idling more
rigs and leading to additional overcapacity among companies serving
the industry.
In June 2020, Seadrill wrote down the value of its rigs by $1.2
billion and said it planned to scrap 10 rigs. Seadrill said it is
in talks with lenders on a restructuring of its $5.7 billion bank
debt.
Seadrill Partners LLC, a limited liability company formed by
deepwater drilling contractor Seadrill Ltd. to own, operate and
acquire offshore drilling rigs, along with its affiliates, sought
Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Lead Case No. 20-35740) on
Dec. 1, 2020, after its parent company swept one of its bank
accounts to pay disputed management fees. Mohsin Y. Meghji,
authorized signatory, signed the petitions.
On Feb. 7, 2021, Seadrill GCC Operations Ltd., Asia Offshore
Drilling Limited, Asia Offshore Rig 1 Limited, Asia Offshore Rig 2
Limited, and Asia Offshore Rig 3 Limited sought Chapter 11
protection. Seadrill GCC estimated $100 million to $500 million in
assets and liabilities as of the bankruptcy filing.
Additionally, on Feb. 10, 2021, Seadrill Limited and 114 affiliated
debtors each filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11
of the United States Bankruptcy Code with the Court. The lead case
is In re Seadrill Limited (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 21-30427).
Seadrill Limited disclosed $7.291 billion in assets against $7.193
billion in liabilities as of the bankruptcy filing.
In the new Chapter 11 cases, the Debtors tapped Kirkland & Ellis
LLP as counsel; Houlihan Lokey, Inc. as financial advisor; Alvarez
& Marsal North America, LLC as restructuring advisor; Jackson
Walker LLP as co-bankruptcy counsel; Slaughter and May as co
corporate counsel; Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS as Norwegian
counsel; and Conyers Dill & Pearman as Bermuda counsel. Prime
Clerk LLC is the claims agent.
On April 9, 2021, the board of directors of Debtor Seadrill North
Atlantic Holdings Limited unanimously adopted resolutions
appointing Steven G. Panagos and Jeffrey S. Stein as independent
directors to the board. Seadrill North Atlantic Holdings Limited
tapped Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP as counsel and AMA
CapitalPartners, LLC, as a financial advisor at the sole direction
of independent directors.
About NSN Debtors
On Jan. 11, 2022, Seadrill New Finance Limited and 11 affiliated
debtors each filed a voluntary petition for relief under
Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. S.D. Tex.
Lead Case No. 22-90001). The cases are pending before the
Honorable David R. Jones.
Seadrill New Finance estimated $500 million to $1 billion in
assets and liabilities as of the bankruptcy filing.
The NSN Debtors tapped KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP as general bankruptcy
counsel; JACKSON WALKER LLP as local bankrutpcy counsel; SLAUGHTER
AND MAY as co-corporate counsel; and PRIME CLERK LLC as claims
agent.
SEANERGY MARITIME: Buys Back Additional $5M of Convertible Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. announced an aggregate of $5
million in buyback and partial elimination of the outstanding
convertible note, utilizing 50% of its second share repurchase
plan. As previously announced and following the full completion of
the first share repurchase plan, the Board of Directors authorized
the additional Plan, under which the Company might repurchase up to
an additional $10 million of its common shares, convertible notes
or warrants.
The Note carries a 5.5% coupon, has a $1.20 per share conversion
price and is held by Jelco Delta Holding Corp. Based on the
conversion price, the buyback is preventing potential dilution of
4.17 million shares. Seanergy will realise annual interest savings
of $275,000 as a result of the deleveraging effect of the
prepayment. Moreover, the Company's cash sweep obligations for
2022 under its outstanding loan and Note with Jelco have been
waived.
The Company expects to record a non-cash accounting loss of
approximately $1.5 million in the first quarter of 2022, associated
with the accounting treatment of the Note. Nonetheless, the
prepayment will have a positive impact on the income statement for
2022-24 through the elimination of non-cash charges of an average
of $0.5 million per year.
Stamatis Tsantanis, the Company's chairman & chief executive
officer, stated: "I am pleased to announce another repurchase of
the Company within a very short period of time. These buybacks
reflect our strong confidence in the Company and the Capesize
market. We firmly believe that both the current levels of our
share price and the conversion price of the Notes are lagging far
behind the true value of the Company.
"We remain committed to enhancing shareholder value. In this
context, we further reduce our financial leverage and diminish the
potential dilution from outstanding share-linked instruments,
eliminating legacy overhang on our share price. At the same time,
our interest expense is expected to further decline following the
prepayment, benefiting the daily cash break-even of the fleet."
About Seanergy Maritime
Greece-based Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. --
http://www.seanergymaritime.com-- is the only pure-play Capesize
ship-owner publicly listed in the US. Seanergy provides marine dry
bulk transportation services through a modern fleet of Capesize
vessels. On a 'fully-delivered' basis, the Company's fleet will
consist of 16 Capesize vessels with average age of 11.5 years and
aggregate cargo carrying capacity of above 2,829,630 dwt.
Seanergy Maritime reported a net loss of $18.35 million for the
year ended Dec. 31, 2020, a net loss of $11.70 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2019, and a net loss of $21.06 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2018. As of Dec. 31, 2020, the Company had $295.24
million in total assets, $199.55 million in total liabilities, and
$95.69 million in total stockholders' equity.
SECONDWAVE CORP: Taps Law Offices of David C. Smith as Counsel
--------------------------------------------------------------
Secondwave Corporation seeks approval from the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the Western District of Washington to employ the Law
Offices of David C. Smith, to serve as legal counsel in its Chapter
11 case.
The firm's services include:
a. providing legal advice to the Debtor with respect to matters
relevant to the case or relating to any distributions to
creditors;
b. preparing pleadings; and
c. performing all other legal services for the Debtor, which may
be necessary.
The firm will be paid at the rate of $350 per hour and will be
reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incurred.
David Smith, Esq., a partner at the Law Offices of David C. Smith,
disclosed in a court filing that his firm is a "disinterested
person" as the term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy
Code.
The firm can be reached at:
David C. Smith, Esq.
Law Offices of David C. Smith
201 Saint Helens Ave
Tacoma, WA 98402
Tel: (253)272-4777
Fax: (253)461-8888
Email: david@davidsmithlaw.com
About Secondwave Corporation
Secondwave Corporation is a Washington family-owned and operated
for-profit corporation. Founded in 2011 serving over 100
charities, its primary business is recycling old cell phones
through an online recycling program. To date, the company has
recycled over 150,000 devices. The old, damaged phones are recycled
in the USA and newer phones are refurbished and resold; then the
company sells the phones on the wholesale market with prices
ranging from $0.25 for scrap phones to over $150.00 for new phones.
A portion of the proceeds is then given to a charity of the
customer's choice.
Secondwave sought protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. W.D. Wash. Case No. 21-41320) on Aug. 9, 2021,
disclosing up to $500,000 in assets and up to $1 million in
liabilities. Ryan Rubel, president of Secondwave, signed the
petition.
Judge Brian D. Lynch oversees the case.
David C. Smith, Esq., at the Law Offices of David Smith, PLLC is
the Debtor's legal counsel.
SELINSGROVE INSTITUTIONAL: Owes More Than $2.4-Mil. to Businesses
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Moore of The Daily Item reports that several Valley
businesses are owed money by Wood-Metal, according to the
Selinsgrove company's Chapter 11 filing in federal court.
In all, more than $2.4 million is owed to the company's top 20
creditors, according to the petition filed Friday in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania by
Wood-Metal, also known as Selinsgrove Institutional Casework LLC.
"It has a lot of tentacles and we are affected. The money we
aren’t getting paid isn't going to buy new equipment from a local
contractor or a new vehicle from a local dealer," said Barry Derr,
owner of Sunbury businesses Northeastern Casework Installations,
which is listed in the petition as being owed $79,012.50 and
Educational Furnishings Co. which is listed as being owed
$28,796.40. "It's a shame (but) we are going to get through it."
Wood-Metal was purchased in August by Maurice and Deb Brubaker, a
married couple who work together in a tax and accounting firm in
Lewisburg and also own two other troubled Snyder County companies,
William Penn Cabinetry, which they launched in February 2020, and a
long-term Middleburg business, Stanley Woodworking, that they
purchased one month later.
Robert Chernicoff, a Harrisburg attorney specializing in bankruptcy
cases, filed the Chapter 11 petition Friday on behalf of Wood-Metal
and said he is negotiating with creditors regarding the
Brubakers’ two other companies.
William Penn, which stopped production in October, will probably
not reopen, he said. Chernicoff said the aim is to keep both
Wood-Metal and Stanley Woodworking in operation.
Roger Hackenberg, owner of the Kreamer family trucking business,
Hackenberg Brothers Inc., said problems arose when the Brubakers
took over the businesses.
"We delivered across Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and in the
New England area. It would take months to get a check," he said.
According to the bankruptcy petition, Hackenberg's company is owed
$34,630.49 and he said another $7,000 is owed him by William Penn.
"I hauled for Stanley Woodworking for 30 years. They wrecked that
business," Hackenberg said.
Among the other local creditors listed in the Wood-Metal petition
are Tru-Bilt Lumber Company, Sunbury, for $246,941.20; Computer
Support Services Inc., of Lewisburg, for $16,475; Wood Mode LLC, of
Kreamer, for $16,000; Geisinger Health Plan, Danville, for
$14,226.34 and Centerfire Display, Middleburg, for $13,835.
About Wood-Metal Industries
Wood-Metal Industries -- is a manufacturer of cabinets and casework
for a variety of applications in education, healthcare and
institutional environments. It offers wide of products like custom
made wood, music and plastic laminate casework in various colours,
thereby enabling clients to choose and enhance the style that
complements their interior design schemes along with performance
and strength.
Selinsgrove Institutional Casework, LLC, doing business as Wood
Metal Industries, sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. M.D. Pa.
Case No. 22-bk-00021) on Jan. 7, 2022.
The Debtor's counsel:
Robert E Chernicoff
Cunningham And Chernicoff PC
Tel: (717) 238-6570
E-mail: rec@cclawpc.com
TEN DOLLAR CAR WASH: Continued Operation to Fund Plan Payments
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ten Dollar Car Wash, LLC, filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
the Western District of Tennessee a Disclosure Statement in support
of Plan of Reorganization dated Jan. 18, 2022.
The Debtor originally incorporated as a Tennessee Limited Liability
Company on March 9, 2016. A new Limited Liability Corporation was
established with the Secretary of State on September 29. 2021.
The COVID pandemic resulted in the loss of income as well as a loss
of labor. Even after the city was reopened, the Debtor had a great
deal of difficulty hiring competent employees.
The purpose of the Plan is to restructure the Debtor's obligations
so that it can be satisfied in full over time by the Debtor's cash
flow from the operation of the business. The Debtor believes that
the reorganization contemplated by the Plan is in its best interest
and the best interest of all the Debtor’s creditors.
The Plan will treat claims as follows:
* Class 1 consists of the Secured Claim filed by the Shelby
County Trustee for delinquent property taxes in the amount of
$64,097.49. The Shelby County Trustee will have an Allowed Secured
Claim in the sum of $64,097.49 with an interest rate of 18 percent
(18%) and a monthly payment of $823.09.
* Class 2 consists of the Secured Claim filed by the Shelby
County Trustee for delinquent property taxes in the amount of
$1,731.62. The Shelby County Trustee will have an Allowed Secured
Claim in the sum of $1,731.62 with an interest rate of 18 percent
(18%) and a monthly payment of $36.00.
* Class 3 consists of the City of Memphis Claim for delinquent
property taxes in the amount of $47,473.08. The City of Memphis
will have an Allowed Secured Claim in the sum of $47,473.08 with an
interest rate of 18 percent (18%) with a payment of $60.44.
* Class 4 consists of the City of Memphis Claim for delinquent
property taxes in the amount of $1,858.70. The City of Memphis will
have an Allowed Secured Claim in the sum of $1,858.70 with an
interest rate of 18 percent (18%) with a payment of $40.00.
* Class 5 consists of the Unsecured Claim of Memphis Light Gas
and Water in the amount of $17,637.95. Memphis Light Gas and Water
shall have an Allowed Unsecured Claim in the amount of $17,637.95
with a zero percent (0%) interest rate and a monthly payment of
$73.87.
* Class 6 consists of the unsecured claim of the TN Dept. of
Labor-Bureau of Unemployment Insurance in the amount of $4,773.37.
Unsecured claim of TN Dept of Labor-Bureau of Unemployment
Insurance shall have an Allowed Unsecured Claim in the amount of
$4,773.37 with a zero percent (0%) interest rate and a monthly
payment of $66.29.
* Claim 7 consists of the Claim of Equity Holder. The Equity
Holder, Ray Chism III, is owed money for unpaid wages as well as
loans. The Equity Holder waives his claim in exchange for retaining
ownership in the Debtor.
The Plan will be funded by the Reorganized Debtor's (a) cash on
hand and monthly income.
A full-text copy of the Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 18, 2022,
is available at https://bit.ly/3AlXqeA from PacerMonitor.com at no
charge.
Counsel for Debtor:
John E. Dunlap, Esq.
Law Office of John E. Dunlap PC
3340 Polar Avenue, Suite 320
Memphis, TN 38111
Tel: (901) 320-1603
Fax: (901) 320-6914
Email: jdunlap00@gmail.com
About Ten Dollar Car Wash LLC
Ten Dollar Car Wash, LLC filed its voluntary petition for Chapter
11 protection (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. Case No. 21-23046) on Sept. 17,
2021, listing as much as $500,000 in both assets and liabilities.
Judge M. Ruthie Hagan presides over the case. The Law Office of
John E. Dunlap serves as the Debtor's legal counsel.
TMT PROCUREMENT: 5th Cir. Affirms C Whale Sale to Pacific Orca
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hsin Chi Su appeals the bankruptcy court's order approving the sale
of the C Whale, a vessel that allegedly contained Su's patented
technology. Su asserts the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to
order the sale of the C Whale free and clear of his purported
patent rights. Su further asserts that the purchaser of the C
Whale, Pacific Orca Holdings, LLC, acted in bad faith.
The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's Sale Order and
held that Su's appeal was moot, finding there was no evidence of
bad faith by Pacific Orca.
Su elevated the matter to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit, which affirmed.
Su is the former owner, president, and director of Appellee C Whale
Corporation. Around March 2007, C Whale Corp. entered into a loan
agreement with Mega International Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. and a
syndicate of lenders as part of a larger contract in which Su
agreed to build a fleet of cargo vessel carriers. These cargo
carriers used technology known as "under-deck piping" which allowed
them to alternate carrying ore and oil. Su personally guaranteed
the loan with Mega Bank.
Mega Bank filed a motion for relief from the automatic bankruptcy
stay so it could sell the C Whale pursuant to the loan agreement.
On March 28, 2014, the bankruptcy court authorized Mega Bank to
sell the C Whale on behalf of the Lenders. The Sale Order
authorized the Lenders to submit a credit bid if no other party
offered a cash bid that exceeded the existing debt.
C Whale Corp. retained H. Clarkson & Co. Ltd. to market the ship
and serve as the broker of the sale. H. Clarkson advertised the C
Whale via email and in trade journals. H. Clarkson received and
responded to numerous inquiries, including twenty requests for
further information and eight requests for inspection.
Approximately one week into the sale process, Su informed the
Lenders that he had applied for patents in Japan, Korea, and China
for his design of the under-deck piping. Regardless of any patent
protections, Su has acknowledged that C Whale Corp. had the right
to use the under-deck piping "for free" and without royalty
payments or licensing fees. No loan documents or other written or
oral agreements between the parties discuss patents: Su admits that
"[n]one of the loan documents contain a single word about patents,
intellectual property, or related licenses."
During the sale process, Su resigned as president and manager of C
Whale Corp. The bankruptcy court appointed Esben Christensen to
oversee the sale process and run C Whale Corp.'s operations.
Neither Su nor any other party contested this appointment.
H. Clarkson received four cash bids for the C Whale, and after
several rounds of bidding, H. Clarkson and C Whale Corp. determined
that the highest purchase offer was $58.2 million. The purchase
offer ($58.2 million) was less than the vessel's debt ($64.8
million) which then allowed the Lenders to submit a credit bid
pursuant to the Sale Order.
The Lenders submitted a credit bid for $58.45 million. C Whale
Corp.'s debt was owned entirely by OCM Formosa Strait Holdings, an
affiliate of Oaktree Capital Management L.P. In the credit bid,
Oaktree designated Pacific Orca, a single-purpose entity affiliated
with Oaktree, to take title of the C Whale at closing.
After bidding closed, two other entities submitted late bids but
neither resulted in a qualified bid under the Sale Order.
Regardless, C Whale Corp., Mega Bank, Oaktree, and Su agreed to
reopen and extend the bidding process for 14 days to solicit higher
bids -- including from the two late bidders -- but no additional
bids were made during this time.
On June 12, 2014, about a month after Su resigned from his role
with C Whale Corp., Su filed objections to the sale of the vessel,
asserting that it could not be sold free and clear of his patents
and related rights. Su asserted that C Whale Corp. and Pacific Orca
acted in bad faith and conspired to obtain the C Whale at a lower
price. At the sale hearing, however, Su withdrew his objections and
consented to the sale with the understanding that he could assert
any viable patent rights against the Lenders in subsequent
proceedings. The bankruptcy court included explicit language
indicating that "the Vessel [was] sold free and clear of all
Alleged Su IP Claims." The bankruptcy court approved the sale of
the C Whale free and clear from all claims and interests, including
the patent claims.
After the sale was finalized, the bankruptcy court conducted a
three-day evidentiary hearing and made specific findings that
Pacific Orca was a good-faith purchaser. The bankruptcy court noted
that there was not even a "scintilla of evidence" suggesting
collusion or bad faith as Su had asserted.
Su appealed the sale of the C Whale and the good faith
determination. Specifically, he argued the bankruptcy court lacked
jurisdiction to sell the C Whale free and clear of his patent
rights because there was no bona fide dispute as to the validity of
the patent which would have conferred jurisdiction. The district
court did not address the bona fide dispute argument. Instead, it
determined the sale was a core bankruptcy proceeding that conferred
jurisdiction. And, the court held that in any event, the appeal was
moot under Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code because Su had
neither obtained a stay of the sale of the C Whale nor shown that
the bankruptcy court clearly erred in determining that Pacific Orca
did not act in bad faith. The district court independently reviewed
the record and found that "[n]o evidence exists of bad faith in the
bidding and sale." This appeal followed.
The Fifth Circuit found it is undisputed that the C Whale was sold
pursuant to Section 363(m) and Su did not seek or obtain a stay of
the Sale Order. Thus, unless the district court clearly erred in
determining that Pacific Orca acted in good faith as the purchaser,
this appeal is moot.
Although the Bankruptcy Code does not explicitly define "good
faith," the Fifth Circuit has defined it in the context of Section
363(m) in two ways. A "good faith purchaser" is "one who purchases
the assets for value, in good faith, and without notice of adverse
claims." Conduct that would destroy good faith includes "fraud,
collusion between the purchaser and other bidders or the trustee,
or an attempt to take grossly unfair advantage of the other
bidders."
On appeal, Su asserts Pacific Orca acted in bad faith because "a
purchaser who credit bids when it has no lien on the property acts
in bad faith as a matter of law." The Fifth Circuit found this
argument somewhat unclear, but it seems Su takes issue with the
fact Mega Bank held the debt against the C Whale but failed to
properly transfer the debt to Pacific Orca pursuant to Bankruptcy
Rule 3001(e) such that Pacific Orca could then submit a credit
bid.
Su did not make this specific argument before the bankruptcy court,
instead raising it for the first time on appeal to the district
court. Thus, the Fifth Circuit held that it would not consider it.
Even assuming this argument was preserved under the larger umbrella
of the good faith determination, Su fails to establish how a
violation of Bankruptcy Rule 3001(e)(2) evinces bad faith, the
Fifth Circuit found.
Bankruptcy Rule 3001(e)(2) states "[i]f a claim other than one
based on a publicly traded note, bond, or debenture has been
transferred other than for security after the proof of claim has
been filed, evidence of the transfer shall be filed by the
transferee." Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001(e)(2).
In re Pine Coast Enterprises, Ltd. -- the only case Su asserts to
support his argument -- does not address Rule 3001 nor does it
stand for the proposition Su represents to the court. Instead, the
court in Pine Coast Enterprises narrowly stated that "[i]n this
case, if [the purchaser] knew that it had no lien on the Disputed
Property at the time the court entered the [Sale] Order, [the
purchaser's] conduct was fraudulent and in bad faith." However, the
court noted that because the parties presented competing evidence
as to the purchaser's knowledge about its lien, rehearing was
warranted.
Meanwhile, in C Whale, the bankruptcy court held a three-day
hearing to assess whether Pacific Orca acted in good faith and it
determined that there was not a "scintilla of evidence" suggesting
bad faith. The district court likewise found "[n]o evidence exists
of bad faith in the bidding and sale." Su has provided no evidence
beyond mere speculation that either Mega Bank or Pacific Orca
violated Bankruptcy Rule 3001(e)(2), the Fifth Circuit said.
Su has likewise failed to provide any case law or other authority,
including the Bankruptcy Code, that suggest a violation of Rule
3001(e)(2) demonstrates bad faith. Even assuming arguendo that a
violation of Rule 3001(e)(2) evinced bad faith, Su has presented no
evidence that Pacific Orca knew it had no lien when it credit bid
on the C Whale. Su's vague assertions and shaky legal premises,
including his sole reliance on a factually distinguishable,
out-of-circuit bankruptcy case, do not show Pacific Orca acted in
bad faith, the Fifth Circuit said.
Further, the record provides ample evidence showing good faith in
the sale process. The C Whale was sold via a broker who fielded
multiple inquiries and offers and conducted a thorough advertising
campaign. Nothing indicates the parties conspired to obtain a lower
purchase price, as Su asserts. Even when Mega Bank and the Lenders
could have successfully purchased the ship through the credit bid
process, the parties—including Su—agreed to reopen the bidding
process to solicit higher offers. The record is absent of any
indication of bad faith.
Because Su has failed to show there is any evidence of bad faith in
the sale of the C Whale or that the bankruptcy court clearly erred
when it found Pacific Orca was a good faith purchaser, his appeal
is moot, the Fifth Circuit said.
The Fifth Circuit also held it lacks jurisdiction over this appeal,
so it need not reach the merits of Su's argument that the
bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to enter the Sale Order free
and clear of his alleged patent rights. The Fifth Circuit has held
that it "cannot reach the question of whether the bankruptcy court
had jurisdiction to order and approve the sale" where, as here, an
appeal is dismissed pursuant to section 363(m). Su "forfeited the
opportunity to contest jurisdiction" which is "fatal to his
position, regardless of whether there was jurisdiction," the Fifth
Circuit concluded.
A full-text copy of the decision dated January 13, 2022, is
available at https://tinyurl.com/y38b3c3e from Leagle.com.
The appeals case is HSIN CHI SU, ALSO KNOWN AS NOBU SU, ALSO KNOWN
AS NOBUYOSHI MORIMOTO, Appellant, v. C WHALE CORPORATION, Appellee,
No. 21-20147 (5th Cir.).
TRANQUILITY GROUP: Taps Silliman to Sell Branson Cedars Resort
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tranquility Group, LLC and its affiliates seek approval from the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri to
employ Silliman Realty & Associates to assist in the sale of
Branson Cedars Resort, a 113-acre resort in Taney County, Mo.
The firm will be paid a commission of 4 percent of the sales
price.
As disclosed in court filings, Silliman is a "disinterested person"
within the meaning of Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.
The firm can be reached at:
Silliman Realty & Associates
3027 West 76 Country Blvd, Suite 100
Branson, MO 65616
Tel: (417) 598-7384
About Tranquility Group
Tranquility Group, LLC is a Ridgedale, Mo.-based company that owns
a vacation destination offering tree houses, log cabins, and
bungalows.
Tranquility Group filed a voluntary petition for relief under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. W.D. Mo. Case No.
21-60120) on Feb. 26, 2021. Michael R. Hyams, chief operating
officer and partner, signed the petition. At the time of the
filing, the Debtor had between $1 million and $10 million in both
assets and liabilities.
Judge Cynthia A. Norton oversees the case.
The Debtor tapped Berman, DeLeve, Kuchan & Chapman, LLC as
bankruptcy counsel; G & H Tax & Accounting as accountant; and
Judson Poppen, Esq., a practicing attorney in Springfield, Mo., as
special counsel.
TRANSDIGM INC: Moody's Alters Outlook on 'B1' CFR to Stable
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed its ratings for TransDigm Inc.,
including the company's B1 corporate family rating and B1-PD
probability of default rating. Concurrently, Moody's affirmed the
Ba3 ratings for the senior secured bank credit facilities and
senior secured notes and also affirmed the B3 ratings for the
senior subordinated notes. The company's SGL-1 speculative grade
liquidity rating remains unchanged. Moody's also changed the
ratings outlook to stable from negative.
The ratings affirmation and change in outlook to stable reflects
Moody's increasing conviction of TransDigm's ability to grow
earnings and strengthen its credit metrics over the next few years.
The outlook is underpinned by Moody's expectation for a gradual
increase in demand in commercial aerospace original equipment
markets, as well as a continued recovery in highly profitable
commercial aftermarkets, through 2022 and 2023. This will result in
a steady, albeit gradual, reduction in TransDigm's high financial
leverage.
The rating actions are also supported by the company's track record
of generating strong and consistent free cash flow despite the
significant business headwinds the company has faced over the last
18 months. In addition, the company has very good liquidity with
$4.8 billion of cash as of September 30, 2021.
The following is a summary of the rating actions:
Issuer: TransDigm Inc.
Corporate Family Rating, affirmed at B1
Probability of Default Rating, affirmed at B1-PD
Senior Secured Bank Credit Facility, affirmed Ba3 (LGD3)
Senior Secured Regular Bond/Debenture, affirmed Ba3 (LGD3)
Senior Subordinated Regular Bond/Debenture, affirmed B3 (LGD5)
Outlook, changed to stable from negative
Issuer: TransDigm Holdings UK plc
Senior Subordinated Regular Bond/Debenture, affirmed B3 (LGD5)
Outlook, changed to stable from negative
RATINGS RATIONALE
The B1 CFR balances TransDigm's aggressive financial policy defined
by its sustained high funded debt and financial leverage and
recurring substantial distributions to shareholders, against its
strong business profile. TransDigm garners very strong margins from
its sole source provider position across a majority of its products
as well as its proprietary designs reflected in its significant
patent portfolio.
TransDigm's debt-to-EBITDA of 9.5x as of September 2021 is very
high and is an outlier for the B1 rating. That said, Moody's
recognizes the uniqueness of TransDigm's business model that has
enabled the company to maintain its industry leading margins and
healthy cash generation, despite sustained earnings pressures. Over
the last two years, TransDigm's EBITDA margins have remained
comfortably in excess of 40%. These high margins, coupled with a
flexible cost structure, allowed TransDigm to generate strong cash
flow through the commercial aerospace downturn, with cumulative
free cash flow of almost $2 billion in fiscal 2020 and 2021 (ended
September).
Moody's believes demand in commercial aerospace markets troughed
several quarters ago and now expects a sustained, albeit measured,
recovery. This will support a gradual reduction in leverage and
Moody's expects TransDigm's debt-to-EBITDA to revert to historical
levels (around 7x) by late fiscal 2023/early fiscal 2024.
Furthermore, Moody's believes it probable that at least a portion
of TransDigm's very sizable cash balances (currently $4.8 billion)
will be deployed to fund acquisitions over the next 12 to 18
months. Moody's expects any such acquisitions to be largely
financed with cash and this will serve to accelerate TransDigm's
deleveraging trajectory. However, Moody's also recognizes that in
the absence of M&A opportunities, there will be a growing
likelihood of TransDigm undertaking a special shareholder dividend
over time.
The SGL-1 speculative grade liquidity rating denotes Moody's
expectations of very good liquidity over the next 12 months.
Moody's expects TransDigm to maintain healthy cash balances over
the next 12-18 months. At September 2021 cash balances were $4.8
billion, although Moody's expects this amount to decline over time,
as the company pursues acquisitions, and potentially shareholder
distributions. Moody's expects TransDigm to generate around $1
billion in free cash flow during fiscal 2022 or 5% FCF-to-debt.
External liquidity is provided by a $810 million revolving credit
facility that expires in 2026 (currently undrawn). Moody's
anticipates that the company will renew its accounts receivables
securitization facility ($350 million, fully utilized) before it
expires in July 2022.
The Ba3 ratings for TransDigm's senior secured term debt and senior
secured bonds are one notch above the CFR, reflecting their
seniority and first lien security interest in substantially all
assets of the company. The B3 rating for the company's senior
subordinated notes is two notches below the CFR and reflects the
subordination of this debt relative to the aforementioned first
lien debt. Both the bank credit facilities and the subordinated
notes are guaranteed by all of TransDigm's existing and future
domestic subsidiaries, as well as the company's holding company
parent TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG).
FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS
Factors that could lead to a downgrade include a deterioration of
TransDigm's liquidity, any dividend distribution that is leveraging
in nature or comes before the business has substantially recovered,
or a meaningful diminishment of interest coverage metrics or EBITDA
margins.
Factors that could lead to an upgrade include debt-to-EBITDA
sustained below 5.5x on a Moody's-adjusted basis, coupled with
maintenance of the company's industry leading margins and
continuation of strong liquidity.
TransDigm Inc., headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, is a manufacturer
of engineered aerospace components for commercial airlines,
aircraft maintenance facilities, original equipment manufacturers
and various agencies of the US Government. TransDigm Inc. is the
wholly-owned subsidiary of TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG).
Revenues for the twelve-month period ended September 30, 2021 were
$4.8 billion.
The principal methodology used in these ratings was Aerospace and
Defense published in October 2021.
TRIDENT BRANDS: Scott Chapman Quits as Director
-----------------------------------------------
Scott Chapman resigned as a director of Trident Brands Incorporated
on Jan. 14, 2022.
About Trident Brands
Based in Brookfield, Wisconsin, Trident Brands Incorporated, f/k/a
Sandfield Ventures Corp., was initially formed to engage in the
acquisition, exploration and development of natural resource
properties, but has since transitioned and is now focused on
branded consumer products and food ingredients. The Company is in
the early growth stage and has commenced commercial activities
following a period of organization and development of its business
plan.
Trident Brands reported a net loss of $5.39 million for the 12
months ended Nov. 30, 2020, compared to a net loss of $12.22
million for the 12 months ended Nov. 30, 2019. As of Aug. 31,
2021, the Company had $1.61 million in total assets, $31.59 million
in total liabilities, and a total stockholders' deficit of $29.97
million.
MaloneBailey, LLP, in Houston, Texas, the Company's auditor since
2015, issued a "going concern" qualification in its report dated
March 16, 2021, citing that the Company has suffered recurring
losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency that
raises
substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.
TRIDENT BRANDS: Settles Everlast Litigation for $650K
-----------------------------------------------------
Trident Brands Incorporated entered into a stipulation of
settlement on Nov. 17, 2021, of the litigation captioned Everlast
World's Boxing Headquarters Corp., Plaintiff vs. Trident Brands,
Inc. and Manchester Capital Inc., Defendants, Case No. 21 Tj 90.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Trident agreed to pay
Everlast on or before Feb. 15, 2022, the sum of $650,000 in full
satisfaction of Everlast's judgment against the company in the
amount of $738,946. Except for the first $250,000 of capital
raised, Trident is required to pay Everlast 20% of the gross amount
of any capital raising transaction until the full $650,000 is paid,
provided however that the full $650,000 must be paid no later than
Feb. 15, 2022. If prior to Feb. 15, 2022 Trident receives
$2,750,000 of proceeds from capital raising, the then existing
balance of $650,000 will simultaneously be paid.
If Trident fails to pay Everlast the full $650,000 by Feb. 15,
2022, the company will be obligated to pay Everlast the judgment
amount of $738,945, plus applicable interest (a total of $750,713
as of Aug. 21, 2021) and attorney's fees, less any payments made.
About Trident Brands
Based in Brookfield, Wisconsin, Trident Brands Incorporated, f/k/a
Sandfield Ventures Corp., was initially formed to engage in the
acquisition, exploration and development of natural resource
properties, but has since transitioned and is now focused on
branded consumer products and food ingredients. The Company is in
the early growth stage and has commenced commercial activities
following a period of organization and development of its business
plan.
Trident Brands reported a a net loss of $5.39 million for the 12
months ended Nov. 30, 2020, compared to a net loss of $12.22
million for the 12 months ended Nov. 30, 2019. As of Aug. 31,
2021, the Company had $1.61 million in total assets, $31.59 million
in total liabilities, and a total stockholders' deficit of $29.97
million.
MaloneBailey, LLP, in Houston, Texas, the Company's auditor since
2015, issued a "going concern" qualification in its report dated
March 16, 2021, citing that the Company has suffered recurring
losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency that raises
substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.
VENUS CONCEPT: Receives FDA 510(k) Clearance for Venus BlissMAX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Venus Concept Inc. has received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration to market the Venus BlissMAX device in the
United States.
BlissMAX is a medical aesthetic platform that offers a
comprehensive solution for fat reduction, cellulite reduction and
muscle conditioning with three technologies in one platform. Like
the Company's Venus Bliss(TM) system, BlissMAX employs advanced
diode laser applicators for non-invasive lipolysis of the abdomen
and flanks in individuals with a BMI of 30 or less, resulting in
reduction of unwanted focal fat, as well as an (MP)2 applicator
that combines Multi-Polar Radio Frequency and Pulsed Electro
Magnetic Fields with advanced VariPulse(TM) technology to reduce
the appearance of cellulite. In addition to these technologies,
BlissMAX also features the Company's FlexMAX EMS applicators,
designed for muscle conditioning to stimulate healthy muscles.
"We are very pleased to receive FDA 510(k) clearance for BlissMAX,
the next generation of our Venus Bliss system, earlier than
anticipated," said Domenic Serafino, chief executive officer of
Venus Concept. "BlissMAX is an important addition to our body
treatment franchise, as we believe the integration of three body
treatment technologies in a single, cost-effective platform will
resonate with physician customers. The BlissMAX provides excellent
results, has little-to-no downtime and offers compelling
profitability per procedure for our customers. We look forward to
initiating a limited commercial launch in the U.S. by the end of
the first quarter of 2022 and believe BlissMAX will be the only
device on the market to offer laser fat reduction, cellulite
reduction and muscle conditioning in a single body contouring
workstation."
About Venus Concept
Toronto, Ontario-based Venus Concept Inc. is an innovative global
medical technology company that develops, commercializes, and
delivers minimally invasive and non-invasive medical aesthetic and
hair restoration technologies and related practice enhancement
services. The Company's aesthetic systems have been designed on a
cost-effective, proprietary and flexible platform that enables the
Company to expand beyond the aesthetic industry's traditional
markets of dermatology and plastic surgery, and into
non-traditional markets, including family and general practitioners
and aesthetic medical spas.
Venus Concept reported a net loss of $82.82 million for the year
ended Dec. 31, 2020, compared to a net loss of $42.29 million for
the year ended Dec. 31, 2019. As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company
had $138.15 million in total assets, $109.38 million in total
liabilities, and $28.77 million in total stockholders' equity.
Toronto, Canada-based MNP LLP issued a "going concern"
qualification in its report dated March 29, 2021, citing that the
Company has reported recurring net losses and negative cash flows
from operations that raises substantial doubt about its ability to
continue as a going concern.
VERANO RECOVERY: Unsecured Creditors to be Paid in Full in Plan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Verano Recovery, LLC, filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the
Central District of California a Disclosure Statement describing
Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization dated Jan. 18, 2022.
The Debtor is the grantee and developer of the Rio Vista Village
Specific Plan in Cathedral City California. Its Managing Member,
Inland Communities, is a real estate developer with its focus in
Southern California.
As of the Petition Date, the Debtor owned and continues to own 100%
of the Property. The Debtor is currently managed by Mr. Jim Ahmad,
the president of Inland Communities, which is the Managing Member
of the Debtor. Pursuant to the Plan, Mr. Jim Ahmad shall manage the
Reorganized Debtor and Inland Communities will remain Debtor's
Managing Member.
This is a reorganizing Chapter 11. The Plan provides for the Debtor
to continue to operate its business, pay Allowed Secured Claim,
Allowed Priority Claims and Administrative Claims and holders of
Allowed General Unsecured Claims in full with interest at the
federal judgment rate, through operation of its business.
The Plan will treat claims as follows:
* Class 1 – Riverside County Tax Collector's Allowed Secured
Claim (Disputed, Contingent and Unliquidated). This Class is
Unimpaired. The Secured Claim in this Class is disputed. Debtor
believes that this claim is duplicative of the City’s Secured
Claim, and an objection will be filed prior to the Plan
confirmation hearing. The Allowed Secured Claim will be paid in
full (unless agreed to otherwise by Claimant) from the proceeds
from the sale of all or a portion of the Property, or the
refinancing proceeds sufficient to pay this claim, within 12 months
from the Effective Date.
* Class 2 – The City of Cathedral City's Allowed Secured
Claim (Disputed, Contingent and Unliquidated). This Class is
Unimpaired. The Secured Claim in this Class is unliquidated and
subject to bona fide dispute. The Allowed Secured Claim will be
paid in full (unless agreed to otherwise by Claimant) from the
proceeds from the sale of all or a portion of the Property, or the
refinancing proceeds sufficient to pay this claim, within 12 months
from the Effective Date.
* Class 3 – RoBott Land High Yield 1 LLC's Allowed Secured
Claim (Disputed, Contingent and Unliquidated). This Class is
Unimpaired. The Secured Claim in this Class is disputed and subject
to pending litigation in the RoBott Adversary. The Allowed Secured
Claim will be paid in full (unless agreed to otherwise by Claimant)
from the proceeds from the sale of all or a portion of the
Property, or the refinancing proceeds sufficient to pay this claim
within 12 months from the Effective Date. Interest shall accrue
from the Effective Date.
* Class 4 – Rio Vista Village's Secured Allowed Claim
(Disputed, Contingent and Unliquidated). This Class is Unimpaired.
The Secured Claim in this Class is subject to bona fide dispute.
The Allowed Secured Claim will be paid in full (unless agreed to
otherwise by Claimant) from the proceeds from the sale of all or a
portion of the Property, or the refinancing proceeds sufficient to
pay this claim, within 12 months from the Effective Date. Interest
shall accrue from the Effective Date.
* Class 5 – General Unsecured Claims. This Class is Impaired
(i.e., Loans from Members or affiliates). The Debtor does not
dispute all unsecured claims in the amount of $810.00. Allowed
General Unsecured Claims will be paid in full within 180 days of
the Effective Date with interest accruing on such Claims from the
Effective Date at the Federal Judgment Rate.
* Class 6 – Interest Holders. This Class is Unimpaired.
Interest Holders are the parties who hold membership interests in
the Debtor. All property of the Debtor's estate shall revest in the
Debtor upon Plan confirmation and Interests in the Debtor shall be
retained and are unimpaired.
The Distributions to creditors under the Plan will be funded
primarily from the following sources: (a) the Debtor's cash on hand
on the Effective Date, and (b) the sale proceeds from the sale of a
portion or all of the Property, or any proceeds from the
refinancing of the Property. Debtor believes that the sale and/or
refinancing proceeds will be sufficient to pay off all creditors in
the amount of their Allowed Claims.
A full-text copy of the Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 18, 2022,
is available at https://bit.ly/3rGRIQD from PacerMonitor.com at no
charge.
Attorneys for Debtor:
Marc C. Forsythe, Esq.
Charity J. Manee
Goe Forsythe & Hodges LLP
18101 Von Karman Ave #1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Tel: 949-798-2460
Fax: 949.955.9437
E-mail: mforsythe@goeforlaw.com
About Verano Recovery
Pasadena, Calif.-based Verano Recovery, LLC, filed its voluntary
petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr.
C.D. Cal. Case No. 21-14127) on May 19, 2021. At the time of the
filing, the Debtor had between $10 million and $50 million in both
assets and liabilities.
Judge Sheri Bluebond presides over the case.
The Debtor tapped Goe Forsythe & Hodges, LLP as bankruptcy counsel,
Corbett Steelman & Spector as special litigation counsel, Armory
Consulting Co. as financial advisor, and Cline Carroll & Bartell,
LLP as accountant.
VPR BRANDS: Issues $200K Promissory Notes to CEO
------------------------------------------------
VPR Brands, LP issued a promissory note on Jan. 18, 2022, in the
principal amount of $100,001 to Kevin Frija, who is the company's
chief executive officer, president, principal financial officer,
principal accounting officer and chairman of the Board of
Directors, and a significant stockholder of the company, in
exchange for the receipt of $100,001.
The principal amount due under the January 18 note bears interest
at the rate of 24% per annum, and the January 18 note permits Mr.
Frija to deduct one ACH payment from the company's bank account in
the amount of $500 per business day until the principal amount due
and accrued interest is repaid. Any unpaid principal amount and
any accrued interest is due on Jan. 18, 2023. The January 18 note
is unsecured.
On Jan. 19, 2022, the company issued a promissory note in the
principal amount of $100,001 to Mr. Frija. The principal amount
due under the January 19 note bears interest at the rate of 24% per
annum, and the January 19 note permits Mr. Frija to deduct one ACH
payment from the company's bank account in the amount of $500 per
business day until the principal amount due and accrued interest is
repaid. Any unpaid principal amount and any accrued interest is
due on Jan. 19, 2023. The January 19 note is unsecured.
About VPR Brands
Headquartered in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, VPR Brands, LP --
http://www.VPRBrands.com-- is company engaged in the electronic
cigarette and personal vaporizer business.
As of Sept. 30, 2021, the Company had $1.23 million in total
assets, $3.36 million in total liabilities, and a total partners'
deficit of $2.13 million.
Hackensack, New Jersey-based Prager Metis CPA's LLC, the Company's
auditor since 2018, issued a "going concern" qualification in its
report dated April 15, 2021, citing that the Company incurred a net
loss of $563,779 for the year ended Dec. 31, 2020, has an
accumulated deficit of $10,342,173 and a working capital deficit of
$1,892,210 at Dec. 31, 2020. These factors, among others, raise
substantial doubt regarding the Company's ability to continue as a
going concern.
WALKER SERVICE: Unsecured Creditors to Recover 100% in Joint Plan
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Walker Service Corp., et al., the Betty Transit, LLC, et al.,
and Trot Service Corp. (collectively, the "Corporate Debtors"), and
Sophie Pross ("S. Pross") and Joe Pross ("the "Individual Debtors")
submitted a Joint Disclosure Statement for Joint Chapter 11 Plan of
Reorganization dated Jan. 18, 2022.
The Corporate Debtors are each owned in whole or in part by J.
Pross and S. Pross, who have been in the taxi medallion business
for over 40 years. Each of the Corporate Debtors own and operate 2
New York City taxi medallions out of their main location on Utica
Avenue in Brooklyn, New York. On March 27, 2020, the Corporate
Debtors filed their Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases.
The bankruptcy of the Corporate Debtors was precipitated by, among
other things, the advent of competing ride services such as Uber
and Lyft, which led to a steep loss of value of the taxi medallions
that secured the Loans, along with the complete shut-down of
services because of the COVID pandemic. On October 13, 2021, the
Individual Debtors filed a voluntary Individual Chapter 11
petition, titled In re Sophie Pross and Joe Pross, Ch. 11 Case No.
21-42600 (ESS) to, among other things, facilitate a global
settlement among the Individual Debtors, PenFed and the Corporate
Debtors.
After the filing of the Corporate Debtor cases and the Individual
Case, PenFed and the Debtors engaged in extensive, arm's-length,
good faith negotiations and have reached a settlement (the "PenFed
Settlement") subject to bankruptcy court approval, whereby PenFed
will accept $8.82 Million in full and final settlement of the
claims included therein against the Debtors.
The PenFed Settlement resolves approximately $20 Million of
asserted claims by PenFed and paves the path for the successful
reorganization of the 21 pending bankruptcy cases of the Corporate
Debtors, as well as the Individual Debtors' chapter 11 case. The
PenFed Settlement requires the Debtors to pay the sum of $8.82MM
(the "PenFed Settlement Amount") in full settlement of the PenFed
Debt upon Court approval of the PenFed Settlement and confirmation
of the chapter 11 plan of reorganization to be filed in each of the
Debtors' cases.
The PenFed Settlement provides for the Debtors to expeditiously
file and confirm the Plan(s) that incorporate the terms of the
PenFed Settlement for it to be effective among the Parties.
Significantly, the Debtors are seeking the relief herein to meet
the timeline for confirming the Plan(s) within the timeframe
prescribed in the heavily negotiated Settlement.
By entering into the PenFed Settlement, the Debtors have
collectively resolved aggregate claims of approximately $20,000,000
with PenFed and avoided the costs and uncertainty of litigation and
inevitable objection to the PenFed claims in the Bankruptcy Cases.
The Debtors believe that the PenFed Settlement is in the best
interests of each Debtor and its respective creditors and estate,
and that it should be approved by the Court. The motion to approve
the PenFed Settlement is returnable January 28, 2022 and has been
served on all creditors and parties in interest.
Class 2 consists of the PenFed Claim against each applicable
Debtor. The PenFed Claim is secured by the property described in
the PenFed Loan Documents, including all of the Corporate Debtors'
assets. PenFed filed a claim in each of the Debtors' cases and its
aggregate claim totals $18,934,939.11. The Individual Debtors are
obligors under the PenFed loans Subject to the Bankruptcy Court’s
approval of the PenFed Settlement Agreement, in exchange for full
and final satisfaction, settlement, release and compromise of the
PenFed Claim as against the Debtors, any and all guarantor(s) and
obligor(s), the Holder of the Allowed PenFed Claim shall be paid
the PenFed Settlement Amount (i.e., $8,820,000) payable in
accordance with, and subject to the terms of, the PenFed Settlement
Agreement.
Class 3 under the Plan consists of the Quorum Claim against the
Individual Debtors. The Quorum Claim was filed in the amount of
approximately $2,964.000.09 as of the Individual Debtors' Petition
Date and is secured by the property described in the Quorum Loan
Documents. The Holder of the Allowed Quorum Claim shall be paid in
accordance with, and subject to the terms of, the Quorum Loan
Documents, which are fully assumed in the Plan.
Class 4 under the Plan consists of the Allowed TD Ameritrade Claim
against the Individual Debtors. The Individual Debtors were
indebted to TD Ameritrade in the amount of approximately
$5,311,726.00. TD Ameritrade shall be paid in accordance with the
terms and provisions of the TD Ameritrade Loan Documents, which are
hereby fully assumed. TD Ameritrade shall retain any lien(s) it may
have on assets of the Individual Debtors and any third parties.
Class 5 consists of all contingent Claims for personal injuries or
property damage arising against the Corporate Debtors from the
Corporate Debtors' taxi business. Contingent Claims, if liquidated
and allowed whether by settlement or judgment, shall receive
payment thereon up to and including the available insurance
coverage under the Corporate Debtors' liability insurance coverage
in effect at the time of the given accident(s), in full
satisfaction of their claims.
Class 6 consists of all General Unsecured Claims against each
applicable Debtor. Each Holder of an Allowed General Unsecured
Claims shall receive, in exchange for full and final satisfaction,
settlement, release and compromise of such Allowed Claim, payment
of 100% of their Allowed Claims, along with any contractual or
statutory interest thereon, on the later of the Effective Date and
the date on which any such General Unsecured Claim becomes an
Allowed General Unsecured Claim, or as soon as reasonably practical
thereafter. Class 6 is Unimpaired.
Class 7 consists of all Interests against each applicable Debtor.
The Holders of Allowed Interests shall retain their equity
interests in each applicable Corporate Debtor but shall receive no
other distribution under the Plan.
Cash reserves have been set aside to fund the Plan and, in
particular, the PenFed Settlement, and shall be used to make the
distributions required under the Plan by the Disbursing Agent
(i.e., Sophie Pross). The Debtors currently have the $8.68MM to
make the initial payments to Penfed and additional funds on hand to
pay their respective Professionals. In addition, ongoing payments
to Quorum and other creditors under the Plan are already being made
in the ordinary course of business and will continue to be paid by
the Individual Debtors. The current income of the Individual
Debtors supports these ongoing obligations to creditors under the
Plan.
A full-text copy of the Joint Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 18,
2022, is available at https://bit.ly/3fVRHm5 from PacerMonitor.com
at no charge.
Counsel for Corporate Debtors:
Robert J. Spence, Esq.
Spence Law Office, P.C.
55 Lumber Road, Suite 5
Roslyn, NY 11576
Telephone: (516) 336-2060
Facsimile: (516) 605-2084
Email: rspence@spencelawpc.com
Counsel for the Individual Debtors:
WESTERMAN BALL EDERER MILLER ZUCKER & SHARFSTEIN, LLP
Thomas A. Draghi, Esq
1201 RXR Plaza
Uniondale, New York 11556
Tel.: 516 622 9200 Ext.: 403
Fax: 516 622 9212
Email: tdraghi@westermanllp.com
About Walker Service
Walker Service Corp. and its debtor-affiliates are privately held
companies in the taxi and limousine service industry.
On March 27, 2020, Walker Service Corp. and 21 affiliates
concurrently filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11
of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Lead Case No. 20-41759). At
the time of the filing, Walker Service disclosed estimated assets
of $100,000 to $500,000 and estimated liabilities of $1 million to
$10 million.
Judge Elizabeth S. Stong oversees the cases. Debtors tapped Griffin
Hamersky LLP and Spence Law Office, P.C. as legal counsel.
WAYNE BARTON: Study Center Hits Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Bandell of South Florida Business Journal reports that Boca
Raton nonprofit The Wayne Barton Study Center has filed Chapter 11
to halt foreclosure.
The Wayne Barton Study Center could sell its educational center in
Boca Raton through Bankruptcy Court after seeking Chapter 11
protection.
Founder Wayne Barton, a former Boca Raton police officer, was
listed as managing member. The organization provides daily
education programs to help children graduate from high school and
attend college.
The Debtor has yet to list a full roster of creditors and
accounting of its assets.
In September, co-plaintiffs Mira Holdings LLC, Pinalillo LLC, KPM
LLC, Enriquez Family Holdings, Inpace US LLC, Emilia Diaz-Padron,
Wekwit Inc. and Carolina Resources LLC filed a $2.5 million
foreclosure lawsuit against the Wayne Barton Study Center and
Barton individually. It targets the 21,975-square-foot educational
building at 269 N.E. 14th St. That case was pending at the time of
the Chapter 11 filing, which put the foreclosure on hold.
Boca Raton-based attorney Aaron Wernick, who represents Wayne
Barton Study Center in bankruptcy court, said the primary purpose
of the Chapter 11 filing was to sell the organization's property.
"We anticipate a competitive auction with multiple bidders,"
Wernick said. "In the interim, the debtor will continue its work
with the community, feeding the hungry in the community and
providing mentoring, counseling and education to children in need,
as it has always done. After the sale, the debtor will continue to
operate, using the excess proceeds from the sale to continue its
mission of helping youth in the community, where the needs are
greater than they've ever been."
Barton will remain personally involved in the organization, he
added.
The school was constructed on the 2.34-acre site in 2001. Its
property is zoned "residential-medium" by the city.
About Wayne Barton Study Center
Wayne Barton Study Center, also known as Barton's Boosters, is a
tax-exempt entity whose purpose is to enhance the health, welfare,
and education of children in need in its community.
Wayne Barton Study Center Inc. sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection (Bankr. S.D. Fla Case No. 22-10384) on Jan. 18, 2022.
In the petition signed by Wayne Barton, president, Wayne Barton
Study Center listed estimated assets between $1 million and $10
million and estimated liabilities between $1 million and $10
million. The case is handled by Honorable Judge Mindy A. Mora.
Aaron A. Wernick, Esq., WERNICK LAW, PLLC, is the Debtor's counsel.
WNJ24K LLC: Resolves Quest & Van Lambalgen Claims Issues
--------------------------------------------------------
WNJ24K, LLC submitted a Disclosure Statement for the Amended Plan
of Reorganization dated Jan. 18, 2022.
The Debtor has asserted counterclaims against the Quest Energy
Pension Fund and Henny Van Lambalgen in a legal dispute related to
the Property as well as a previous real estate investment. See
Henny Van Lambalgen v. WNJ24K, LLC et al., case No. CV2019-15654.
The Debtor values its counterclaims at approximately $700,000.
Quest/Van Lambalgen's total demand, which Debtor disputes, exceeds
$1,400,000.
On or about January 18, 2022, the Debtor entered into a stipulation
with Quest and Mr. Van Lambalgen fully and finally resolving the
outstanding claims between them and fixing their treatment under
this Plan.
The goal of the Plan is to sell the Property and use the proceeds
to pay creditors more than they would receive in a chapter 7
liquidation or if the property were sold at a trustee's sale
pursuant to an order lifting the automatic stay.
In accordance with the priority scheme under the Bankruptcy Code,
debts incurred postpetition must be paid on the Effective Date of
the plan, unless the holders of such claims agree otherwise.
Allowed Secured Claims will be paid from the proceeds of the sale
of the Property and/or from a post-petition secured note.
Pre-petition, non-insider unsecured creditors will receive their
pro rata share of (i) any remaining sale proceeds, and (ii) the
insider contribution of $50,000. If the Plan is confirmed, the
equity holders of the Debtor have agreed to waive any and all
claims they hold against the Debtor, which will increase the pro
rata distribution to non-insiders.
Class 1 consists of the Allowed Secured Claim of DLJ Mortgage
Capital, Inc. DLJ filed a secured proof of claim in the amount of
$2,580,463.01. Debtor disputes this amount. The Class 1 claim shall
be treated as follows:
* If the holder of the Class 1 claim votes in favor of the
Plan, it may elect from the following options: (1) the holder of
the Class 1 claim may elect to receive a one-time payment of
$2,000,000.00 on the Effective Date in full and final satisfaction
of its disputed claim; or (2) the holder of the Class 1 claim will
retain its lien on the Property and shall receive a note from the
Buyer in the amount of its Allowed Secured claim, which note shall
provide for monthly payments of principal and interest on a 20 year
amortization at a fixed rate equal to the Wall Street Journal Prime
Rate plus 1.5%.
* If the holder of the Class 1 claim votes against the Plan or
does not vote, it shall retain its lien on the Property and shall
receive a note from the Buyer in the amount of its Allowed Secured
claim (as determined by the Court or by stipulation of the
parties), which note shall provide for monthly payments of
principal and interest on a 20-year amortization at a fixed rate
equal to the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate plus 1.5%.
Class 2 consists of the Allowed Secured Claims of Quest Energy
Pension Fund and Henny Van Lambalgen (collectively, "Quest").
Pursuant to a stipulation between the Debtor and Quest, the Class 2
claim holders shall be paid $800,000 on the Effective Date in full
and final satisfaction of their claims.
Class 4 consists of the Allowed Secured Claim of Joshua Massari.
Mr. Massari asserts a secured claim in the amount of $387,250.00.
The Class 4 claim holder shall be paid $50,000 under the Plan in
full satisfaction of his claim.
Like in the prior iteration of the Plan, total amount of scheduled
and filed claims in Class 5 Non-Insider General Unsecured Claims is
approximately $1,416,962.41. Each holder of an Allowed Class 5
Claim shall receive its pro rata share of (i) the Insider
Contribution and (ii) the net proceeds of the sale of the Property
(if any), after payment of Classes 1-4, administrative claims, and
priority tax claims.
All payments required by the Plan shall be funded with (i) the
Insider Contribution and (ii) the sale of the Property to the
Buyer. Total distributions under the Plan are expected to be
approximately $3,900,000.
A full-text copy of the Disclosure Statement dated Jan. 18, 2022,
is available at https://bit.ly/3qUEvVc from PacerMonitor.com at no
charge.
Counsel for Debtor:
Andrew A. Harnisch, Esq.
Grant L. Cartwright, Esq.
MAY, POTENZA, BARAN & GILLESPIE, P.C.
1850 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1600
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4633
Telephone: (602) 252-1900
Facsimile: (602) 252-1114
E-mail: gcartwright@maypotenza.com
aharnisch@maypotenza.com
About WNJ24K LLC
WNJ24K, LLC, a single asset real estate investment entity that owns
a luxury residence located at 6418 E. Joshua Tree Lane, Paradise
Valley, Arizona, sought protection under Chapter 11 of the
Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 21-05257) on July 8,
2021, listing as much as $10 million in both assets and
liabilities. Judge Madeleine C. Wanslee oversees the case. May,
Potenza, Baran & Gillespie, P.C., is the Debtor's legal counsel.
[*] Dorsey & Whitney Opens Phoenix Office
-----------------------------------------
International law firm Dorsey & Whitney LLP on Jan. 19 disclosed
that it has opened an office in Phoenix, Arizona. The new Phoenix
office is the Firm's 20th location. The lawyers establishing
Dorsey's Phoenix office include Scott Jenkins, Isaac Gabriel, and
Andrea Palmer, all of whom most recently practiced in the Phoenix
office of the Quarles & Brady law firm. All of them join Dorsey as
partners.
Scott Jenkins, Dorsey's Phoenix Office Head, is a trusted advisor
and problem solver for his clients and contacts. While Scott's
practice focuses on commercial litigation and bankruptcy and
creditors' rights litigation, his clients also rely on him for
guidance with all their legal needs and connecting them with the
best attorneys to resolve their problem. His accolades include
being named in Best Lawyers and Super Lawyers as well as being
named to the Phoenix Business Journal's (2020) list of "Most
Admired Leaders" and Phoenix Magazine's (2020) Great 48 list of the
most influential Phoenix business leaders. Scott is passionate
about giving back to his community. He served as the Tournament
Chairmen in 2021 for the WM Phoenix Open and is currently the
President of The Thunderbirds, a civic organization that raise
substantial funds for numerous local charities.
Isaac Gabriel focuses on bankruptcy, creditor's rights litigation,
and commercial litigation. He brings a pragmatic and rational
approach to his clients' matters which often involve highly
contested and financially distressed situations. Clients that he
serves include banks, other lending institutions, special
servicers, commercial landlords, and corporate clients in all
aspects of corporate restructurings, workouts, and insolvency
proceedings, including substantial experience in commercial Chapter
11 restructurings. Isaac also brings his restructuring and
insolvency experience in representing and advising his clients in
various litigation and alternative dispute resolution proceedings.
Isaac is listed in both Best Lawyers and Southwest Super Lawyers.
Andrea Palmer focuses her practice on representing lenders in
commercial finance transactions, loan workouts, modifications and
debt restructurings. She advises clients at all stages of financing
transactions from term sheet negotiations, documentation and
closing to workouts and restructurings over the life of the loan.
Andrea regularly represents lenders in documenting and closing
single bank and syndicated commercial loans, real estate loans,
asset-based financings, construction loans, leasehold financing and
loans secured by collateral in multiple states.
"Entering the vital and growing market of Phoenix with this
outstanding group of attorneys provides an important strategic
extension of our geographic coverage and an excellent beginning to
our plans to deliver a full-service offering in this market," said
Bill Stoeri, Managing Partner of Dorsey. "With offices in Phoenix,
Salt Lake City and Denver, the Mountain West region has become
extremely important to Dorsey. We see great opportunity for further
growth in Phoenix and throughout the region."
"Dorsey is clearly committed to success in Phoenix, where our group
has practiced for many years, and the Firm is an ideal fit to build
a full service office that compliments Dorsey's strategic national
and international goals. It is truly an exciting opportunity for us
and we are looking forward to introducing Dorsey to the Phoenix
market," said new Dorsey Partner and head of the Phoenix office,
Scott Jenkins.
About Dorsey & Whitney LLP
Clients have relied on Dorsey since 1912 as a valued business
partner. With locations across the United States and in Canada,
Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, Dorsey provides an integrated,
proactive approach to its clients' legal and business needs. Dorsey
represents a number of the world's most successful companies from a
wide range of industries, including leaders in banking & financial
institutions, development & infrastructure (with a strong emphasis
on real estate transactions), energy & natural resources, food,
beverage & agribusiness, healthcare and technology, as well as
major non-profit and government entities.
[*] Tucson Bankruptcy Filings Down for 2nd Straight Year
--------------------------------------------------------
David Wichner of Tucson.com reports that the COVID relief efforts
had helped keep Tucson bankruptcy filings down in 2021.
The number of bankruptcies filed in Tucson and across Arizona fell
for the second year in a row in 2021, reflecting a nationwide trend
as pandemic relief measures helped keep businesses and consumers
afloat.
Statewide last 2021 compared with 2020, bankruptcy filings of all
types fell 27.5%, to 9,353, while filings in Tucson dropped 23.7%,
to 2,228, according to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s Arizona
district.
Filings in the Phoenix area dropped 29%, while filings in the
court's Yuma office fell 22.7%, the court said.
Nationwide, total bankruptcy filings during 2021 decreased 24% from
2020, according to the American Bankruptcy Institute, a nonprofit
group of bankruptcy professionals based in Alexandria, Virginia.
The decrease in 2021 filings reflected the government relief
programs, moratoriums, lender deferments and low interest rates
intended to help families and businesses survive the COVID-19
pandemic, said American Bankruptcy Institute Executive Director Amy
Quackenboss said.
But 2022 could be a different story, she said.
"Consumers and businesses are now facing the new year with less
government relief, fewer lender deferments, rising inflation,
worker shortages and supply chain challenges as the pandemic
continues," Quackenboss said.
In Arizona, Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings -- mainly used by
businesses to protect them from legal action while they work out a
plan to repay creditors -- fell about 38% last year statewide and
more than 40% in Phoenix.
Tucson saw an increase to eight Chapter 11 cases from seven in
2020, after falling from 23 filings in 2019.
Business-related Chapter 11 filings in the Tucson district last
year included Crestwood Hospitality LLC, owner of the Holiday Inn
Express & Suites at Tucson Mall, which has filed a reorganization
plan and continues to operate the hotel; a skylight installation
contractor; and two doctors.
Chapter 7 bankruptcy filings, under which a debtor's assets are
liquidated to repay creditors, fell nearly 27% statewide, dropping
more than 22% in Tucson and about 29% in Phoenix.
Chapter 13 bankruptcy filings, which allow individual debtors to
reorganize their debts under a repayment plan, fell 27% statewide
and about 22% in the Tucson district.
After peaking in 2010 in the wake of the Great Recession,
bankruptcy filings across Arizona fell steadily until 2017, when
overall filings rose 4% statewide. Statewide filings rose about 3%
in 2018 and 2019 before plunging more than 20% in 2020.
[*] Wilson Elser Promotes 19 Attorneys to Partners
--------------------------------------------------
National law firm Wilson Elser on Jan. 18 announced the promotion
to partner of 19 attorneys, effective January 1, 2022.
"Congratulations to our 2022 partner class as they move up the
ranks of the firm," said Wilson Elser Chair Daniel McMahon. "Each
of these 19 attorneys brings an in-depth understanding of our
clients' business and legal needs, and we look forward to even
greater contributions to the advancement of our firm and our
clients."
Albany, New York
Christopher Priore is a commercial and appellate litigator with
broad experience across multiple industries and areas who routinely
practices before state and federal appellate courts. His practice
includes successfully litigating complex commercial cases and cases
involving novel constitutional issues. Mr. Priore has represented
construction firms and owners in construction defect and lien law
disputes as well as creditors and lenders in various creditors'
rights, loan workouts and bankruptcy matters. He also represents
large hospitality groups in various matters, including liquor
licensing. Albany Law School, J.D.; Clarkson University.
Atlanta, Georgia
Lawrence Lee Washburn IV provides commercial litigation and
services, including transactional matters, professional liability,
employment matters and general liability defense. He also has
experience representing lenders and secured creditors in lending
origination and post-default matters. Mr. Washburn has represented
national banks and large-debt funds in state and federal courts,
including bankruptcy matters; large trucking companies and insurers
in multiple states; parties on both sides of construction defect
cases; product liability actions related to motor vehicles and
electronics; and health care providers facing claims of malpractice
and potential reputational damage. University of Georgia School of
Law, J.D.; Vanderbilt University.
Detroit, Michigan
Anthony Pieti defends professional liability claims, including
medical and legal malpractice; design professionals, including
architects and engineers; and life agent/broker-dealers. He also
defends auto/trucking and transportation liability, product
liability and intellectual property claims. Mr. Pieti is a
mechanical engineer with 10 years of engineering experience at Ford
Motor Company and Visteon, where he worked in automotive design and
test engineering before pursuing a legal career. Mr. Pieti also has
a master's degree in finance and handles commercial litigation and
transactions; he is able to analyze all financial aspects/impacts
of a claim in great depth. University of Detroit Mercy School of
Law, J.D.; University of Michigan-Dearborn and University of
Michigan.
Florham Park, New Jersey
Andrew Heck has extensive experience defending general liability,
transportation, product liability, construction defect and workers'
compensation claims in his diverse civil litigation practice. He
has defended clients in those fields in a wide variety of settings,
including against claims of catastrophic injury and wrongful death.
Rutgers School of Law, J.D.; The College of New Jersey.
Jennifer Moran defends personal injury claims on behalf of
commercial property owners, construction companies, restaurants,
transportation companies and landlords, with a concentration on
large-scale commercial properties, condominium associations and
construction accident claims throughout New Jersey. Ms. Moran has
experience in all phases of commercial litigation and focuses on
early, practical and cost-effective resolution while achieving the
best possible results. She also has significant experience in
appellate practice. Rutgers School of Law – Newark, J.D.;
Stockton University.
Timothy Wheeler is a restructuring attorney with extensive
experience in creditors' rights and commercial litigation. His
practice includes representing individual creditors, creditors'
committees and debtors in complex restructuring matters in various
jurisdictions. Mr. Wheeler also has significant experience
litigating on behalf of national banks and other commercial
entities in federal and state courts. Seton Hall University School
of Law, J.D.; Princeton University.
Houston, Texas
Garett Willig handles a broad array of matters throughout Texas,
and focuses his practice on general liability, professional
liability and products liability claims. Following a successful
career in health care and medical marketing, Mr. Willig worked for
two Texas-based firms and gained experience in first-party
insurance defense, contractual disputes and qui tam litigation.
Since 2009, Mr. Willig has extended his practice to the defense of
high-exposure design, engineering and construction matters; product
liability defect claims; and transportation cases. He is a member
of several national and local client general liability teams and
the Wilson Elser National Trial Team. South Texas College of Law,
J.D.; University of Texas at Austin.
Los Angeles, California
Adam Le Berthon is a trial lawyer who handles complex and
multiparty business litigation. He has extensive experience
defending professional liability claims, product liability and mass
tort actions filed against pharmaceutical and consumer products
companies, and has represented numerous companies and individuals
involved in environmental litigation. Mr. Le Berthon also has
experience structuring and negotiating the settlement of individual
and large groups of related cases. University of Southern
California, J.D.; University of San Diego.
Louisville, Kentucky
Lindsay Gray defends personal injury, premises liability, bad faith
and insurance coverage claims. She represents individuals, national
insurers, motor carriers, national restaurants, medical facilities,
and other regional and national companies in connection with
personal injuries, coverage disputes, negligence, and claims of bad
faith. University of Louisville, Brandeis School of Law, J.D.;
Hanover College.
Edward O'Brien practices in the areas of construction litigation,
appellate advocacy, insurance and reinsurance coverage, commercial
disputes, insurance defense, medical malpractice and nursing home
defense, risk management, transportation, products liability and
general civil defense. Mr. O'Brien is the co-founder and managing
editor of the Kentucky Appellate Survey, a publication that
summarizes, analyzes and contextualizes all holdings from
Kentucky's appellate courts; he is the former editor in chief of
the University of Louisville Law Review. University of Louisville,
Brandeis School of Law, J.D.; Sam Houston State University.
McLean, Virginia
Camille Shora specializes in medical and dental malpractice. Over
her career, she has represented professionals in
construction-defect litigation as well as in the field of product
liability. She also handles complex general liability matters in
Washington, D.C., Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia, and has
appeared in matters in state and federal courts and before
professional boards. Born and raised in France, Ms. Shora also
works with French and Canadian insurers, corporations and
individuals, and has assisted in cases involving French parties,
including aviation, transportation and personal injury matters.
West Virginia University, J.D.; Pierre Mendès-France University.
Miami, Florida
Erin McGrath handles a wide range of cases, including commercial
litigation, product liability, professional liability and general
liability. She also has experience representing clients in complex
construction litigation and toxic tort cases, as well as employment
practice matters. Ms. McGrath provides thorough strategic advice to
clients ranging from individuals to large corporations and
technology companies. She previously served as a prosecutor at the
Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office, where she accumulated extensive
trial experience. Hofstra University School of Law, J.D.;
Providence College.
New Orleans, Louisiana
Ross Molina handles pre- and post-incident cybersecurity, data
privacy and breach response for clients internationally. He is a
member of Wilson Elser's cybersecurity team, on call to provide
24/7 advice to clients and to assist in detecting, containing and
responding to an attack. In addition to assisting clients'
restoration efforts, Mr. Molina provides guidance on breach
response obligations, including compliance and notification to
individuals as well as state and federal regulators as required
under state and federal breach notification laws. He also assists
clients with pre-breach preparedness training. University of
Oklahoma, College of Law, J.D.; Louisiana State University.
New York Metro
Nathan Horst, a member of Wilson Elser's Germany Practice,
represents European clients in litigation, arbitration and other
dispute resolution matters. These clients include insurers,
reinsurers, manufacturers, financial institutions and service
providers. Mr. Horst has extensive experience representing clients
across state and federal jurisdictions in a wide variety of
commercial, contract and corporate litigations at the trial and
appellate levels, including products liability actions, real estate
disputes, breach of contract actions, securities litigation, and
defense of director and officer liability suits. Columbia Law
School, J.D.; University of Georgia.
Ashley Humphries defends complex, high-exposure medical malpractice
claims. She has obtained favorable results during all facets of
litigation from inception through trial on behalf of hospitals,
private practices, medical schools, health care systems and most
allied health professionals. Ms. Humphries is experienced in an
array of medical specialties and has lectured to several of the
firm's hospital and medical school clients on medical malpractice
cases, litigation and risk management issues, and has participated
in Grand Rounds lectures. Villanova University School of Law, J.D.;
Fordham University.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Caroline S. Vahey is an experienced trial lawyer in Pennsylvania
and New Jersey who concentrates her practice in the areas of
construction law, security, general casualty, product liability and
premises liability. In addition to her command of substantive law
and her ability to master complex facts, Ms. Vahey enhances her
trial skills by investing the time to learn her clients' businesses
and the industries in which they operate. Chicago-Kent College of
Law, J.D.; Catholic University of America.
San Francisco, California
Nicholas Lane has represented individuals and organizations in a
variety of national and international disputes before federal and
state courts and in alternative dispute resolutions. He defends
clients by identifying and mitigating exposure and developing
leverage opportunities against opposing parties. Mr. Lane has a
professional background in the marine industry as a navigational
officer aboard commercial ships. San Francisco Law School, J.D.;
California State University Maritime Academy.
Jianlin Song worked as a physician in Beijing, China, a career that
provided her with the background and knowledge to represent
companies and individual practitioners in the life sciences and
health care industries as an attorney. During her 15-year legal
career, Dr. Song has defended manufacturers across the spectrum of
life science products. She also has represented clinical and
diagnostic laboratories and dental, medical and nursing
practitioners in professional malpractice cases, and in response to
investigations by their respective professional boards. Rutgers
School of Law, J.D.; University of Houston, School of Optometry;
Peking University Health Science Center.
Washington, D.C.
Callyson Grove maintains a diverse practice covering a wide range
of litigation matters, a substantial portion of which involves
litigating medical malpractice cases on behalf of health care
providers across all medical specialties. Ms. Grove also handles
legal malpractice, employment and product liability claims, among
others. Barred in the District of Columbia and Maryland, she has
handled cases pro hac vice in other jurisdictions and has appeared
in multiple international arbitrations. Ms. Grove has authored
briefs on behalf of appellees and appellants before the Maryland
Court of Special Appeals and the D.C. Court of Appeals. The George
Washington University Law School, J.D.; University of
Wisconsin–Madison.
About Wilson Elser
Wilson Elser -- http://www.wilsonelser.com/-- helps individuals
and organizations transcend challenges and realize goals by
offering an optimal balance of legal excellence and bottom-line
value. More than 900 attorneys strong, Wilson Elser serves clients
of all sizes, across multiple industries and around the world
through a network of 41 strategically located offices in the United
States and an office in London. It is a founding member of Legalign
Global, a close alliance of some of the world's leading insurance
law firms. This depth and scale make Wilson Elser one of the
nation's most influential law firms, ranked 103 in the Am Law 200
and among the top 53 in the National Law Journal 500.
[^] Large Companies with Insolvent Balance Sheet
------------------------------------------------
Total
Share Total
Total Holders' Working
Assets Equity Capital
Company Ticker ($MM) ($MM) ($MM)
------- ------ ------ -------- -------
ACCELERATE DIAGN 1A8 TH 81.2 (39.7) 64.0
ACCELERATE DIAGN 1A8 QT 81.2 (39.7) 64.0
ACCELERATE DIAGN 1A8 GR 81.2 (39.7) 64.0
ACCELERATE DIAGN AXDX US 81.2 (39.7) 64.0
ACCELERATE DIAGN AXDX* MM 81.2 (39.7) 64.0
AEMETIS INC DW51 GZ 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC DW51 TH 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC DW51 QT 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC DW51 GR 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC AMTX US 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC AMTXGEUR EZ 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AEMETIS INC AMTXGEUR EU 147.0 (132.1) (57.6)
AERIE PHARMACEUT AERIEUR EU 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
AERIE PHARMACEUT 0P0 GR 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
AERIE PHARMACEUT 0P0 TH 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
AERIE PHARMACEUT 0P0 QT 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
AERIE PHARMACEUT AERI US 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
AERIE PHARMACEUT 0P0 GZ 351.8 (72.9) 157.8
ALPHA CAPITAL -A ASPC US 231.1 212.7 1.0
ALPHA CAPITAL AC ASPCU US 231.1 212.7 1.0
ALTENERGY ACQU-A AEAE US 0.5 (0.1) (0.1)
ALTENERGY ACQUIS AEAEU US 0.5 (0.1) (0.1)
ALTICE USA INC-A ATUS-RM RM 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A 15PA GZ 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A ATUS US 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A 15PA TH 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A 15PA GR 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A ATUSEUR EU 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTICE USA INC-A ATUS* MM 33,432.7 (1,132.7) (2,824.2)
ALTIRA GP-CEDEAR MOC AR 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTIRA GP-CEDEAR MOD AR 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTIRA GP-CEDEAR MO AR 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO-RM RM 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO* MM 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC PHM7 TH 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO TE 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MOEUR EU 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO US 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO SW 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC ALTR AV 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC PHM7 GR 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC PHM7 GZ 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC 0R31 LI 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MOUSD SW 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MO CI 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC MOEUR EZ 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP INC PHM7 QT 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
ALTRIA GROUP-BDR MOOO34 BZ 39,564.0 (1,226.0) (2,092.0)
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AH9 GZ 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AMC-RM RM 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN A2MC34 BZ 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AMC US 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AH9 GR 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AMC4EUR EU 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AMC* MM 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AH9 TH 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMC ENTERTAINMEN AH9 QT 11,057.5 (1,642.7) 173.8
AMERICAN AIR-BDR AALL34 BZ 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL-RM RM 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL_KZ KZ 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE A1G GR 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL* MM 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL US 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE A1G TH 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE A1G GZ 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL11EUR EU 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL AV 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL TE 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE A1G SW 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE AAL11EUR EZ 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMERICAN AIRLINE A1G QT 66,442.0 (7,340.0) (1,669.0)
AMYRIS INC 3A01 GZ 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC AMRS* MM 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC 3A01 GR 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC 3A01 TH 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC AMRS US 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC 3A01 SW 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC 3A01 QT 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC AMRSEUR EU 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
AMYRIS INC AMRSEUR EZ 542.3 (53.3) (182.0)
APELLIS PHARMACE APLS US 525.7 (57.3) 381.2
APELLIS PHARMACE 1JK TH 525.7 (57.3) 381.2
APELLIS PHARMACE 1JK GR 525.7 (57.3) 381.2
APELLIS PHARMACE APLSEUR EU 525.7 (57.3) 381.2
APOLLO ENDOSURGE HQ8F TH 71.1 (0.1) 39.0
APOLLO ENDOSURGE APEN US 71.1 (0.1) 39.0
APOLLO ENDOSURGE HQ8F GR 71.1 (0.1) 39.0
APOLLO ENDOSURGE APEN1EUR EU 71.1 (0.1) 39.0
ARCH BIOPARTNERS ARCH CN 2.7 (4.8) (1.4)
ARCHIMEDES TECH ATSPU US 133.8 133.5 0.6
ARCHIMEDES- SUB ATSPT US 133.8 133.5 0.6
ARTERIS INC AIP US 40.6 (15.0) (12.2)
ATHENA BITCOIN G ABIT US 0.0 (1.6) (1.6)
ATLAS TECHNICAL ATCX US 420.1 (144.9) 103.2
AUSTERLITZ ACQ-A AUS US 692.9 614.7 (5.4)
AUSTERLITZ ACQUI AUS/U US 692.9 614.7 (5.4)
AUTOZONE INC AZO-RM RM 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZO US 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZ5 GR 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZ5 TH 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZ5 GZ 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZOEUR EZ 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZO AV 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZ5 TE 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZO* MM 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZOEUR EU 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC AZ5 QT 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AUTOZONE INC-BDR AZOI34 BZ 14,460.9 (2,124.7) (1,738.7)
AVID TECHNOLOGY AVD TH 248.9 (126.4) (6.5)
AVID TECHNOLOGY AVD GZ 248.9 (126.4) (6.5)
AVID TECHNOLOGY AVID US 248.9 (126.4) (6.5)
AVID TECHNOLOGY AVD GR 248.9 (126.4) (6.5)
AVIS BUD-CEDEAR CAR AR 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CUCA GZ 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CUCA GR 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CAR US 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CAR* MM 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CAR2EUR EZ 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CUCA TH 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CUCA QT 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
AVIS BUDGET GROU CAR2EUR EU 21,610.0 (198.0) (231.0)
BACKBLAZE INC-A BLZE US 60.4 (12.1) (32.1)
BANYAN ACQUISITI BYN/U US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
BATH & BODY WORK LTD0 GZ 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK BBWI-RM RM 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK LTD0 GR 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK BBWI US 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK LTD0 TH 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK BBWI* MM 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK LTD0 QT 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK LBEUR EZ 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK BBWI AV 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BATH & BODY WORK LBEUR EU 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BHC CN 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BHC US 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BVF GR 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BVF TH 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BVF GZ 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO VRX1EUR EU 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BVF QT 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO VRX1EUR EZ 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO VRX SW 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BAUSCH HEALTH CO BHCN MM 29,252.0 (135.0) (113.0)
BELLRING BRAND-A BRBR US 696.5 (65.5) 136.8
BELLRING BRAND-A BR6 TH 696.5 (65.5) 136.8
BELLRING BRAND-A BR6 GR 696.5 (65.5) 136.8
BELLRING BRAND-A BRBR1EUR EU 696.5 (65.5) 136.8
BELLRING BRAND-A BR6 GZ 696.5 (65.5) 136.8
BENEFITFOCUS INC BNFTEUR EU 252.4 (2.0) 65.9
BENEFITFOCUS INC BNFT US 252.4 (2.0) 65.9
BENEFITFOCUS INC BTF GR 252.4 (2.0) 65.9
BIGBEAR.AI HOLDI BBAI US 360.3 344.9 (1.1)
BIGBEAR.AI HOLDI 28K1 GR 360.3 344.9 (1.1)
BIGBEAR.AI HOLDI GIG2EUR EU 360.3 344.9 (1.1)
BIOCRYST PHARM BCRX US 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BO1 GR 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BO1 TH 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BCRXEUR EU 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BO1 QT 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BCRX* MM 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOCRYST PHARM BCRXEUR EZ 265.8 (147.0) 119.1
BIOHAVEN PHARMAC BHVN US 1,131.2 (531.2) 482.1
BIOHAVEN PHARMAC 2VN GR 1,131.2 (531.2) 482.1
BIOHAVEN PHARMAC BHVNEUR EU 1,131.2 (531.2) 482.1
BIOHAVEN PHARMAC 2VN TH 1,131.2 (531.2) 482.1
BLUE BIRD CORP 4RB TH 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUE BIRD CORP 4RB QT 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUE BIRD CORP BLBD US 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUE BIRD CORP 4RB GR 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUE BIRD CORP 4RB GZ 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUE BIRD CORP BLBDEUR EU 356.0 (32.7) 31.3
BLUEACACIA LTD BLEUU US 254.7 (7.8) (7.8)
BLUEACACIA LTD-A BLEU US 254.7 (7.8) (7.8)
BOEING CO-BDR BOEI34 BZ 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO-CED BAD AR 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO-CED BA AR 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BACL CI 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA_KZ KZ 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BOE LN 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BCO TH 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA PE 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BOEI BB 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA US 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA SW 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA* MM 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA TE 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BAEUR EU 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BCO GR 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA EU 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA-RM RM 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BCO GZ 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA AV 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BAUSD SW 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA CI 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BAEUR EZ 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BA EZ 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE BCO QT 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOEING CO/THE TR TCXBOE AU 146,846.0 (14,266.0) 31,117.0
BOMBARDIER INC-B BBDBN MM 12,532.0 (3,211.0) 1,296.0
BRIDGEBIO PHARMA 2CL GR 781.5 (735.9) 543.9
BRIDGEBIO PHARMA BBIOEUR EU 781.5 (735.9) 543.9
BRIDGEBIO PHARMA 2CL GZ 781.5 (735.9) 543.9
BRIDGEBIO PHARMA 2CL TH 781.5 (735.9) 543.9
BRIDGEBIO PHARMA BBIO US 781.5 (735.9) 543.9
BRIDGEMARQ REAL BRE CN 84.3 (55.8) 9.9
BRINKER INTL BKJ TH 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BRINKER INTL BKJ GR 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BRINKER INTL EAT US 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BRINKER INTL EAT2EUR EU 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BRINKER INTL BKJ QT 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BRINKER INTL EAT2EUR EZ 2,339.4 (325.5) (329.9)
BROOKFIELD INF-A BIPC US 9,176.0 (1,148.0) (2,097.0)
BROOKFIELD INF-A BIPC CN 9,176.0 (1,148.0) (2,097.0)
BRP INC/CA-SUB V B15A TH 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
BRP INC/CA-SUB V B15A GR 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
BRP INC/CA-SUB V DOOO US 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
BRP INC/CA-SUB V DOO CN 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
BRP INC/CA-SUB V DOOEUR EU 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
BRP INC/CA-SUB V B15A GZ 4,572.6 (226.8) 252.5
CACTUS ACQUISITI CCTS US 0.2 (0.3) (0.3)
CACTUS ACQUISITI CCTSU US 0.2 (0.3) (0.3)
CALUMET SPECIALT CLMT US 1,833.9 (300.2) (273.4)
CARBON STREAMING NETZ CN - (0.5) (0.5)
CARBON STREAMING M2Q GR - (0.5) (0.5)
CARBON STREAMING OFSTFEUR EU - (0.5) (0.5)
CARBON STREAMING M2Q GZ - (0.5) (0.5)
CARBON STREAMING OFSTF US - (0.5) (0.5)
CASPER SLEEP INC CSPR US 220.0 (43.0) (23.9)
CEDAR FAIR LP FUN US 2,814.5 (682.6) 331.8
CENTRUS ENERGY-A 4CU GZ 487.2 (229.1) 79.0
CENTRUS ENERGY-A 4CU TH 487.2 (229.1) 79.0
CENTRUS ENERGY-A 4CU GR 487.2 (229.1) 79.0
CENTRUS ENERGY-A LEU US 487.2 (229.1) 79.0
CENTRUS ENERGY-A LEUEUR EU 487.2 (229.1) 79.0
CHOICE CONSOLIDA CDXX-U/U CN 173.8 (3.3) -
CHOICE CONSOLIDA CDXXF US 173.8 (3.3) -
CINEPLEX INC CGXEUR EU 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CX0 TH 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CGXN MM 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CX0 GZ 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CX0 GR 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CPXGF US 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CINEPLEX INC CGX CN 2,108.8 (199.8) (351.0)
CLEAR CHANNEL OU CCO US 5,365.3 (3,287.8) 110.8
CLEARWATER AN-A CWAN US 326.6 242.4 272.9
COEPTIS THERAPEU COEP US 0.2 (0.6) (0.6)
COGENT COMMUNICA OGM1 GR 1,008.7 (356.8) 337.1
COGENT COMMUNICA CCOI US 1,008.7 (356.8) 337.1
COGENT COMMUNICA CCOIEUR EU 1,008.7 (356.8) 337.1
COGENT COMMUNICA CCOI* MM 1,008.7 (356.8) 337.1
COMMUNITY HEALTH CG5 GZ 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
COMMUNITY HEALTH CYH US 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
COMMUNITY HEALTH CG5 GR 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
COMMUNITY HEALTH CG5 QT 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
COMMUNITY HEALTH CYH1EUR EU 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
COMMUNITY HEALTH CG5 TH 15,670.0 (1,000.0) 1,087.0
CORESITE REALTY COR US 2,167.0 (9.8) -
CORESITE REALTY 07H GR 2,167.0 (9.8) -
CORESITE REALTY 07H TH 2,167.0 (9.8) -
CORVUS GOLD INC KOR US 12.8 (7.3) (12.9)
CORVUS GOLD INC KOR CN 12.8 (7.3) (12.9)
COVEO SOLUTIONS CVO CN 176.5 (981.8) 87.8
CPI CARD GROUP I PMTSEUR EU 252.3 (122.5) 86.0
CPI CARD GROUP I PMTS US 252.3 (122.5) 86.0
CPI CARD GROUP I CPB1 GR 252.3 (122.5) 86.0
CRIXUS BH3 ACQ-A BHAC US 0.3 (0.0) (0.3)
CRIXUS BH3 ACQUI BHACU US 0.3 (0.0) (0.3)
D2L INC DTOL CN 123.1 (201.4) (224.6)
DECARBONIZATIO-A DCRD US 321.4 (57.0) 0.9
DECARBONIZATION DCRDU US 321.4 (57.0) 0.9
DEEP MEDICI-CL A DMAQ US 0.4 (0.1) 0.4
DELEK LOGISTICS DKL US 930.5 (104.8) (61.5)
DENNY'S CORP DE8 TH 411.0 (89.6) (43.5)
DENNY'S CORP DE8 GZ 411.0 (89.6) (43.5)
DENNY'S CORP DENN US 411.0 (89.6) (43.5)
DENNY'S CORP DENNEUR EU 411.0 (89.6) (43.5)
DENNY'S CORP DE8 GR 411.0 (89.6) (43.5)
DIALOGUE HEALTH CARE CN 142.0 126.1 112.3
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD GZ 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD SW 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD GR 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD US 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBDEUR EU 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD TH 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBDEUR EZ 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIEBOLD NIXDORF DBD QT 3,586.9 (863.5) 361.6
DIGITAL MEDIA-A DMS US 267.9 (46.2) 19.5
DINE BRANDS GLOB IHP TH 1,922.5 (254.3) 148.7
DINE BRANDS GLOB IHP GZ 1,922.5 (254.3) 148.7
DINE BRANDS GLOB DIN US 1,922.5 (254.3) 148.7
DINE BRANDS GLOB IHP GR 1,922.5 (254.3) 148.7
DMY TECHNOLOGY G DMYS/U US 0.5 (0.1) (0.5)
DMY TECHNOLOGY G DMYS US 0.5 (0.1) (0.5)
DOMINO'S P - BDR D2PZ34 BZ 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZ-RM RM 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA EZV GR 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZ US 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA EZV TH 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZEUR EU 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA EZV GZ 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZEUR EZ 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZ AV 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA DPZ* MM 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMINO'S PIZZA EZV QT 1,764.4 (4,127.5) 429.6
DOMO INC- CL B DOMO US 211.1 (112.6) (46.2)
DOMO INC- CL B 1ON GR 211.1 (112.6) (46.2)
DOMO INC- CL B DOMOEUR EU 211.1 (112.6) (46.2)
DOMO INC- CL B 1ON GZ 211.1 (112.6) (46.2)
DOMO INC- CL B 1ON TH 211.1 (112.6) (46.2)
DROPBOX INC-A 1Q5 GZ 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBX-RM RM 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBXEUR EU 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A 1Q5 QT 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBX AV 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBX US 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A 1Q5 GR 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A 1Q5 TH 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A 1Q5 SW 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBXEUR EZ 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
DROPBOX INC-A DBX* MM 3,339.1 (162.6) 881.2
EAST RESOURCES A ERESU US 345.3 (40.5) (40.5)
EAST RESOURCES-A ERES US 345.3 (40.5) (40.5)
EFFECTOR THERAPE EFTR US 59.9 (7.7) 12.6
EFFECTOR THERAPE LWK1 TH 59.9 (7.7) 12.6
EFFECTOR THERAPE EFTREUR EU 59.9 (7.7) 12.6
EFFECTOR THERAPE LWK1 GR 59.9 (7.7) 12.6
ESPERION THERAPE 0ET GZ 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE 0ET SW 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE ESPR US 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE 0ET TH 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE ESPREUR EU 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE 0ET QT 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE ESPREUR EZ 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
ESPERION THERAPE 0ET GR 225.3 (362.7) 92.2
EXCELFIN ACQUI-A XFIN US 0.4 (0.2) (0.6)
EXCELFIN ACQUISI XFINU US 0.4 (0.2) (0.6)
F45 TRAINING HOL FXLV US 166.6 110.9 59.9
F45 TRAINING HOL 4OP GR 166.6 110.9 59.9
F45 TRAINING HOL FXLVEUR EU 166.6 110.9 59.9
F45 TRAINING HOL 4OP TH 166.6 110.9 59.9
F45 TRAINING HOL 4OP GZ 166.6 110.9 59.9
F45 TRAINING HOL 4OP QT 166.6 110.9 59.9
FAIR ISAAC CORP FRI GR 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FICO US 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FRI GZ 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FRI QT 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FICOEUR EU 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FICO1* MM 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FAIR ISAAC CORP FICOEUR EZ 1,567.8 (110.9) (8.2)
FARADAY FUTURE I FFIE US 229.9 (9.4) (2.4)
FERRELLGAS PAR-B FGPRB US 1,776.6 (196.4) 262.4
FERRELLGAS-LP FGPR US 1,776.6 (196.4) 262.4
FLUENCE ENERGY I FLNC US 717.7 (56.2) (110.0)
FOREST ROAD AC-A FRXB US 351.3 (26.2) 0.9
FOREST ROAD ACQ FRXB/U US 351.3 (26.2) 0.9
GAMES & ESPORTS GEEXU US 0.6 (0.0) (0.5)
GCM GROSVENOR-A GCMG US 512.9 (110.2) 174.7
GLOBAL CLEAN ENE GCEH US 352.9 (53.4) (50.1)
GLOBAL SPAC -SUB GLSPT US 169.8 (11.0) (5.4)
GLOBAL SPAC PART GLSPU US 169.8 (11.0) (5.4)
GLOBAL TECHNOL-A GTAC US 1.3 (0.1) (0.6)
GLOBAL TECHNOLOG GTACU US 1.3 (0.1) (0.6)
GODADDY INC -BDR G2DD34 BZ 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A 38D GZ 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A 38D GR 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A 38D QT 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A 38D TH 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A GDDY* MM 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GODADDY INC-A GDDY US 7,298.0 (101.1) (715.5)
GOGO INC G0G GZ 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGO INC GOGO US 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGO INC G0G TH 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGO INC GOGOEUR EU 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGO INC G0G GR 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGO INC G0G QT 443.2 (560.2) 20.1
GOGREEN INVESTME GOGN/U US 0.3 (0.1) (0.3)
GOGREEN INVESTME GOGN US 0.3 (0.1) (0.3)
GOLDEN NUGGET ON LCA2EUR EU 289.0 (45.4) 106.9
GOLDEN NUGGET ON 5ZU TH 289.0 (45.4) 106.9
GOLDEN NUGGET ON GNOG US 289.0 (45.4) 106.9
GOOSEHEAD INSU-A 2OX TH 247.1 (75.7) 16.8
GOOSEHEAD INSU-A 2OX QT 247.1 (75.7) 16.8
GOOSEHEAD INSU-A GSHD US 247.1 (75.7) 16.8
GOOSEHEAD INSU-A 2OX GR 247.1 (75.7) 16.8
GOOSEHEAD INSU-A GSHDEUR EU 247.1 (75.7) 16.8
GORES HOLD VII-A GSEV US 551.9 515.7 (15.0)
GORES HOLDINGS V GSEVU US 551.9 515.7 (15.0)
GORES TECH-B GTPB US 461.7 425.9 (18.1)
GORES TECHNOLOGY GTPBU US 461.7 425.9 (18.1)
GRAFTECH INTERNA EAF* MM 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA G6G GR 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA G6G TH 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA EAFEUR EU 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA G6G QT 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA EAF US 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA EAFEUR EZ 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAFTECH INTERNA G6G GZ 1,393.1 (110.7) 359.1
GRAPHITE BIO INC GRPH US 416.2 400.1 390.0
GREEN VISOR FI-A GVCI US 0.7 (0.1) (0.8)
GREEN VISOR FINA GVCIU US 0.7 (0.1) (0.8)
GREENSKY INC-A GSKY US 1,405.0 (74.5) 668.4
GULFPORT ENERGY GPOR US 2,088.2 49.0 (836.2)
GULFPORT ENERGY G2U0 GR 2,088.2 49.0 (836.2)
HAGERTY INC-A HGTY US 117.4 102.3 1.1
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HLF US 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HOO GR 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HOO GZ 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HOO TH 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HLFEUR EZ 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HLFEUR EU 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HERBALIFE NUTRIT HOO QT 2,853.0 (1,333.4) 488.4
HEWLETT-CEDEAR HPQD AR 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HEWLETT-CEDEAR HPQC AR 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HEWLETT-CEDEAR HPQ AR 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HILTON WORLD-BDR H1LT34 BZ 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HI91 GZ 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLT-RM RM 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HI91 GR 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HI91 TH 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLT* MM 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLT US 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLTEUR EU 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLTEUR EZ 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HLTW AV 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HI91 TE 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HILTON WORLDWIDE HI91 QT 15,314.0 (1,128.0) 72.0
HORIZON GLOBAL 2H6 GZ 468.3 (25.9) 115.3
HORIZON GLOBAL HZN US 468.3 (25.9) 115.3
HORIZON GLOBAL 2H6 GR 468.3 (25.9) 115.3
HORIZON GLOBAL HZN1EUR EU 468.3 (25.9) 115.3
HP COMPANY-BDR HPQB34 BZ 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ-RM RM 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ TE 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC 7HP GR 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ US 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC 7HP TH 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ* MM 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC 7HP GZ 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQEUR EU 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQUSD SW 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ CI 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQEUR EZ 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ AV 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC HPQ SW 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HP INC 7HP QT 38,610.0 (1,650.0) (6,926.0)
HPX CORP HPX/U US 253.9 (21.3) 0.4
HPX CORP HPX US 253.9 (21.3) 0.4
IMMUNITYBIO INC 26CA QT 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC IBRX US 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC 26CA GR 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC NK1EUR EU 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC 26C GZ 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC NK1EUR EZ 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
IMMUNITYBIO INC 26CA TH 214.4 (189.9) 29.0
INFINITE AC-CL A NFNT US 0.4 (0.1) (0.5)
INFINITE ACQUISI NFNT/U US 0.4 (0.1) (0.5)
INSEEGO CORP INSG-RM RM 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INO TH 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INO QT 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INSG US 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INO GR 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INSGEUR EU 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INSGEUR EZ 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSEEGO CORP INO GZ 220.5 (15.3) 61.2
INSPIRED ENTERTA 4U8 GR 303.8 (120.9) 14.7
INSPIRED ENTERTA INSEEUR EU 303.8 (120.9) 14.7
INSPIRED ENTERTA INSE US 303.8 (120.9) 14.7
INTERCEPT PHARMA I4P GZ 523.1 (156.0) 352.5
INTERCEPT PHARMA ICPT US 523.1 (156.0) 352.5
INTERCEPT PHARMA I4P GR 523.1 (156.0) 352.5
INTERCEPT PHARMA I4P TH 523.1 (156.0) 352.5
INTERCEPT PHARMA ICPT* MM 523.1 (156.0) 352.5
J. JILL INC JILL US 466.2 (48.9) (20.2)
JACK IN THE BOX JACK US 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JACK IN THE BOX JBX GR 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JACK IN THE BOX JBX GZ 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JACK IN THE BOX JBX QT 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JACK IN THE BOX JACK1EUR EZ 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JACK IN THE BOX JACK1EUR EU 1,750.1 (817.9) (160.1)
JUNIPER II COR-A JUN US 12.5 (0.0) (0.4)
JUNIPER II CORP JUN/U US 12.5 (0.0) (0.4)
KARYOPHARM THERA 25K GR 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KARYOPHARM THERA 25K TH 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KARYOPHARM THERA KPTI US 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KARYOPHARM THERA 25K QT 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KARYOPHARM THERA 25K GZ 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KARYOPHARM THERA KPTIEUR EU 254.1 (126.0) 172.7
KL ACQUISI-CLS A KLAQ US 288.6 267.7 0.7
KL ACQUISITION C KLAQU US 288.6 267.7 0.7
KNOWBE4 INC-A KNBE US 463.9 172.1 137.2
L BRANDS INC-BDR B1BW34 BZ 6,031.0 (1,675.0) 1,550.0
LDH GROWTH C-A LDHA US 232.6 216.7 2.1
LDH GROWTH CORP LDHAU US 232.6 216.7 2.1
LENNOX INTL INC LXI GR 2,123.5 (334.8) 84.5
LENNOX INTL INC LII US 2,123.5 (334.8) 84.5
LENNOX INTL INC LII* MM 2,123.5 (334.8) 84.5
LENNOX INTL INC LXI TH 2,123.5 (334.8) 84.5
LENNOX INTL INC LII1EUR EU 2,123.5 (334.8) 84.5
LESLIE'S INC LESL US 1,043.8 (217.6) 292.0
LESLIE'S INC LE3 GR 1,043.8 (217.6) 292.0
LESLIE'S INC LESLEUR EU 1,043.8 (217.6) 292.0
LESLIE'S INC LE3 TH 1,043.8 (217.6) 292.0
LESLIE'S INC LE3 QT 1,043.8 (217.6) 292.0
LI-METAL CORP LIMEUR EU 0.0 (1.9) (1.9)
LI-METAL CORP 5ZO GR 0.0 (1.9) (1.9)
LI-METAL CORP 5ZO TH 0.0 (1.9) (1.9)
LI-METAL CORP 5ZO QT 0.0 (1.9) (1.9)
LI-METAL CORP LIM CN 0.0 (1.9) (1.9)
LIFESPEAK INC LSPK CN 83.9 54.0 67.5
LIFESPEAK INC 81F GR 83.9 54.0 67.5
LIFESPEAK INC LSPKEUR EU 83.9 54.0 67.5
LION ELECTRIC CO LEV US 551.0 332.8 386.7
LION ELECTRIC CO LEV CN 551.0 332.8 386.7
LION ELECTRIC CO LEVEUR EU 551.0 332.8 386.7
LION ELECTRIC CO 70U TH 551.0 332.8 386.7
LION ELECTRIC CO 70U GR 551.0 332.8 386.7
LION ELECTRIC CO 70U QT 551.0 332.8 386.7
LOWE'S COS INC LOW-RM RM 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LOW US 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LWE GR 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LWE TH 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LWE GZ 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LOW* MM 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LWE QT 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LOWEUR EU 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LOWE AV 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LOWEUR EZ 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS INC LWE TE 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
LOWE'S COS-BDR LOWC34 BZ 49,400.0 (1,576.0) 4,015.0
MADISON SQUARE G MS8 TH 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MADISON SQUARE G MS8 QT 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MADISON SQUARE G MS8 GZ 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MADISON SQUARE G MS8 GR 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MADISON SQUARE G MSG1EUR EU 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MADISON SQUARE G MSGS US 1,327.9 (232.2) (263.8)
MAGNET FORENSICS MAGT CN 148.9 86.7 82.3
MAGNET FORENSICS 91T GR 148.9 86.7 82.3
MAGNET FORENSICS MAGTEUR EU 148.9 86.7 82.3
MAGNET FORENSICS MAGTF US 148.9 86.7 82.3
MANNKIND CORP NNFN GZ 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MANNKIND CORP MNKD US 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MANNKIND CORP NNFN TH 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MANNKIND CORP NNFN GR 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MANNKIND CORP NNFN QT 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MANNKIND CORP MNKDEUR EU 238.2 (184.7) 109.2
MARKETWISE INC MKTW US 403.4 (441.9) (198.5)
MASON INDUS-CL A MIT US 502.3 (33.8) 1.7
MASON INDUSTRIAL MIT/U US 502.3 (33.8) 1.7
MATCH GROUP -BDR M1TC34 BZ 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC 4MGN GZ 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC MTCH-RM RM 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC MTCH US 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC 4MGN TH 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC MTCH1* MM 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC 4MGN QT 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC 4MGN GR 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MATCH GROUP INC MTC2 AV 4,893.6 (59.5) 304.1
MBIA INC MBJ GZ 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MBIA INC MBJ TH 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MBIA INC MBI US 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MBIA INC MBJ GR 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MBIA INC MBI1EUR EU 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MBIA INC MBJ QT 4,816.0 (157.0) -
MCAFEE CORP - A MCFE US 3,484.0 (1,765.0) (398.0)
MCAFEE CORP - A MC7 GR 3,484.0 (1,765.0) (398.0)
MCAFEE CORP - A MCFEEUR EU 3,484.0 (1,765.0) (398.0)
MCAFEE CORP - A MC7 TH 3,484.0 (1,765.0) (398.0)
MCDONALD'S CORP TCXMCD AU 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS - BDR MCDC34 BZ 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD-RM RM 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCDCL CI 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MDO TH 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD SW 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD US 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MDO GR 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD* MM 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD TE 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCDEUR EU 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MDO GZ 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD AV 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCDUSD SW 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCD CI 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MCDEUR EZ 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP 0R16 LN 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS CORP MDO QT 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS-CEDEAR MCD AR 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS-CEDEAR MCDC AR 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCDONALDS-CEDEAR MCDD AR 52,727.0 (5,675.0) 1,700.3
MCKESSON CORP MCK-RM RM 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK GR 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK US 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK* MM 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK TH 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK GZ 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK1EUR EZ 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK1EUR EU 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON CORP MCK QT 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MCKESSON-BDR M1CK34 BZ 63,601.0 (87.0) (495.0)
MEDIAALPHA INC-A MAX US 245.5 (72.9) 46.6
MELI KASZEK PI-A MEKA US 10.7 (55.9) (6.6)
MEWCOURT ACQUISI NCACU US 0.2 (0.1) (0.3)
MINORITY EQUAL-A MEOA US 129.5 (18.8) 0.8
MINORITY EQUALIT MEOAU US 129.5 (18.8) 0.8
MONEYGRAM INTERN MGI US 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MONEYGRAM INTERN 9M1N GR 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MONEYGRAM INTERN 9M1N TH 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MONEYGRAM INTERN MGIEUR EU 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MONEYGRAM INTERN MGIEUR EZ 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MONEYGRAM INTERN 9M1N QT 4,483.9 (185.9) 18.3
MOTOROLA SOL-BDR M1SI34 BZ 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOL-CED MSI AR 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MSI-RM RM 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MTLA GR 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MOT TE 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MSI US 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MTLA TH 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MTLA GZ 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MSI1EUR EU 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MSI1EUR EZ 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MOSI AV 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MOTOROLA SOLUTIO MTLA QT 11,422.0 (248.0) 1,306.0
MSCI INC 3HM TH 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC MSCI AV 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC MSCI-RM RM 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC MSCI US 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC 3HM GR 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC 3HM SW 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC 3HM QT 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC 3HM GZ 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC MSCIEUR EZ 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC MSCI* MM 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MSCI INC-BDR M1SC34 BZ 5,142.7 (280.0) 830.4
MUDRICK CAP ACQ MUDSU US 321.3 (33.8) (4.7)
MUDRICK CAPITA-A MUDS US 321.3 (33.8) (4.7)
NATHANS FAMOUS NATH US 116.5 (56.0) 87.3
NATHANS FAMOUS NFA GR 116.5 (56.0) 87.3
NATHANS FAMOUS NATHEUR EU 116.5 (56.0) 87.3
NEIGHBOURLY PHAR NBLY CN 514.2 318.1 84.8
NEW ENG RLTY-LP NEN US 288.9 (44.8) -
NEWCOURT ACQ-A NCAC US 0.2 (0.1) (0.3)
NOBLE CORP NE US 2,094.8 1,366.7 179.4
NOBLE CORP 85V0 GR 2,094.8 1,366.7 179.4
NOBLE CORP 85V0 QT 2,094.8 1,366.7 179.4
NOBLE CORP NE1EUR EU 2,094.8 1,366.7 179.4
NOBLE ROCK ACQ-A NRAC US 243.1 224.7 1.3
NOBLE ROCK ACQUI NRACU US 243.1 224.7 1.3
NORTHERN OIL AND 4LT1 TH 1,244.1 (157.7) (187.6)
NORTHERN OIL AND 4LT1 GZ 1,244.1 (157.7) (187.6)
NORTHERN OIL AND NOG US 1,244.1 (157.7) (187.6)
NORTHERN OIL AND 4LT1 GR 1,244.1 (157.7) (187.6)
NORTHERN OIL AND NOG1EUR EU 1,244.1 (157.7) (187.6)
NORTONLIFEL- BDR S1YM34 BZ 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I NLOK-RM RM 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I NLOK US 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYM TH 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYM GR 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYMC TE 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYM GZ 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYMCEUR EU 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYMC AV 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I NLOK* MM 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYMCEUR EZ 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NORTONLIFELOCK I SYM QT 6,733.0 (232.0) (864.0)
NUTANIX INC - A NTNX-RM RM 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A 0NU GZ 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A 0NU GR 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A NTNXEUR EU 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A 0NU TH 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A 0NU QT 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A NTNX US 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
NUTANIX INC - A NTNXEUR EZ 2,254.6 (698.7) 647.6
O'REILLY AUT-BDR ORLY34 BZ 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLY-RM RM 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT OM6 TH 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLYEUR EU 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT OM6 GZ 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLY AV 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT OM6 GR 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLY US 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLY* MM 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT ORLYEUR EZ 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
O'REILLY AUTOMOT OM6 QT 11,789.4 (140.9) (1,427.5)
OMEROS CORP 3O8 GZ 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OMEROS CORP OMER US 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OMEROS CORP 3O8 GR 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OMEROS CORP 3O8 TH 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OMEROS CORP OMEREUR EU 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OMEROS CORP 3O8 QT 123.4 (262.7) 48.5
OPTIVA INC OPT CN 95.5 (34.3) 27.5
OPY ACQUISIT-A OHAA US 0.2 (0.0) (0.2)
OPY ACQUISITION OHAAU US 0.2 (0.0) (0.2)
ORACLE BDR ORCL34 BZ 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CO-CEDEAR ORCLC AR 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CO-CEDEAR ORCLD AR 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CO-CEDEAR ORCL AR 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCLCL CI 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL-RM RM 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL US 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORC GR 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORC TH 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL TE 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL* MM 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP 0R1Z LN 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL AV 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORC GZ 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCLUSD SW 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL CI 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCLEUR EZ 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCL SW 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORCLEUR EU 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORACLE CORP ORC QT 106,897.0 (9,658.0) 12,197.0
ORGANON & CO OGN US 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO 7XP TH 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO OGN-WEUR EU 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO OGN* MM 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO 7XP GR 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO 7XP GZ 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO 7XP QT 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
ORGANON & CO OGN-RM RM 11,335.0 (1,618.0) 1,200.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTIS AV 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTIS-RM RM 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTIS US 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI 4PG GR 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTISEUR EZ 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI 4PG GZ 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTISEUR EU 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI OTIS* MM 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI 4PG TH 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI 4PG QT 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
OTIS WORLDWI-BDR O1TI34 BZ 10,472.0 (3,233.0) 12.0
PANAMERA HOLDING PHCI US 0.0 (0.1) (0.1)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PP1 TH 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PZZAEUR EZ 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PP1 QT 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PZZA US 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PP1 GR 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PZZAEUR EU 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PAPA JOHN'S INTL PP1 GZ 890.0 (129.5) (46.4)
PARATEK PHARMACE N4CN GZ 182.3 (105.0) 123.9
PARATEK PHARMACE PRTK US 182.3 (105.0) 123.9
PARATEK PHARMACE N4CN GR 182.3 (105.0) 123.9
PARATEK PHARMACE N4CN TH 182.3 (105.0) 123.9
PEPPERLIME HEA-A PEPL US 4.8 (0.0) (0.6)
PEPPERLIME HEALT PEPLU US 4.8 (0.0) (0.6)
PET VALU HOLDING PET CN 542.1 (152.2) 19.5
PHILIP MORRI-BDR PHMO34 BZ 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PMIZ TQ 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM-RM RM 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN 4I1 GR 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM US 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM1CHF EU 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN 4I1 TH 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM1 TE 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM1EUR EU 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PMI SW 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PMOR AV 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN 4I1 GZ 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN 0M8V LN 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PMIZ EB 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PMIZ IX 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM1CHF EZ 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM1EUR EZ 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN PM* MM 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PHILIP MORRIS IN 4I1 QT 41,589.0 (8,632.0) (31.0)
PLANET FITNESS I P2LN34 BZ 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A 3PL GZ 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A 3PL QT 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A PLNT1EUR EU 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A PLNT US 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A 3PL TH 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A 3PL GR 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
PLANET FITNESS-A PLNT1EUR EZ 1,949.7 (658.4) 468.9
POTBELLY CORP PBPB US 256.8 (0.3) (44.6)
PROJECT ENERGY R PEGRU US 0.7 (0.0) (0.7)
PROJECT ENERGY R PEGR US 0.7 (0.0) (0.7)
QUANTUM CORP QNT2 TH 198.5 (116.0) (2.3)
QUANTUM CORP QNT2 GZ 198.5 (116.0) (2.3)
QUANTUM CORP QMCO US 198.5 (116.0) (2.3)
QUANTUM CORP QNT2 GR 198.5 (116.0) (2.3)
QUANTUM CORP QTM1EUR EU 198.5 (116.0) (2.3)
RADIUS HEALTH IN RDUS US 186.2 (242.5) 87.4
RADIUS HEALTH IN 1R8 TH 186.2 (242.5) 87.4
RADIUS HEALTH IN 1R8 QT 186.2 (242.5) 87.4
RADIUS HEALTH IN RDUSEUR EU 186.2 (242.5) 87.4
RADIUS HEALTH IN 1R8 GR 186.2 (242.5) 87.4
RAPID7 INC RPD* MM 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC R7D GZ 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC R7D QT 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC R7D SW 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC RPDEUR EU 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC RPD US 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC R7D GR 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RAPID7 INC R7D TH 1,260.9 (105.0) 17.4
RCF ACQUISIT-A RCFA US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
RCF ACQUISITION RCFA/U US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
REAL GOOD FOOD C RGF US 43.8 (52.3) (40.0)
RENT THE RUNWA-A RENT US 478.4 104.9 220.3
REVLON INC-A RVL1 GR 2,448.2 (2,066.3) 248.3
REVLON INC-A REV US 2,448.2 (2,066.3) 248.3
REVLON INC-A REVEUR EU 2,448.2 (2,066.3) 248.3
REVLON INC-A RVL1 TH 2,448.2 (2,066.3) 248.3
REVLON INC-A REV* MM 2,448.2 (2,066.3) 248.3
RIMINI STREET IN 0QH GR 256.7 (160.2) (64.2)
RIMINI STREET IN RMNIEUR EU 256.7 (160.2) (64.2)
RIMINI STREET IN 0QH QT 256.7 (160.2) (64.2)
RIMINI STREET IN RMNI US 256.7 (160.2) (64.2)
ROSE HILL ACQU-A ROSE US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
ROSE HILL ACQUIS ROSEU US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
RR DONNELLEY & S DLLN GZ 3,093.4 (223.6) 502.9
RR DONNELLEY & S DLLN TH 3,093.4 (223.6) 502.9
RR DONNELLEY & S RRDEUR EU 3,093.4 (223.6) 502.9
RR DONNELLEY & S RRD US 3,093.4 (223.6) 502.9
RR DONNELLEY & S DLLN GR 3,093.4 (223.6) 502.9
RYMAN HOSPITALIT RHP US 3,537.8 (27.1) (6.8)
RYMAN HOSPITALIT 4RH GR 3,537.8 (27.1) (6.8)
RYMAN HOSPITALIT RHPEUR EU 3,537.8 (27.1) (6.8)
RYMAN HOSPITALIT 4RH TH 3,537.8 (27.1) (6.8)
RYMAN HOSPITALIT 4RH QT 3,537.8 (27.1) (6.8)
SABRE CORP 19S GZ 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP SABR US 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP 19S GR 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP 19S TH 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP 19S SW 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP 19S QT 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP SABREUR EU 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SABRE CORP SABREUR EZ 5,442.9 (355.1) 830.9
SBA COMM CORP 4SB GZ 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP SBAC US 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP 4SB GR 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP SBACEUR EU 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP 4SB QT 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP 4SB TH 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP SBACEUR EZ 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMM CORP SBAC* MM 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SBA COMMUN - BDR S1BA34 BZ 9,668.1 (4,943.1) (188.2)
SCIENTIFIC GAMES TJW QT 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCIENTIFIC GAMES SGMS1EUR EU 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCIENTIFIC GAMES TJW TH 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCIENTIFIC GAMES TJW GZ 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCIENTIFIC GAMES SGMS US 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCIENTIFIC GAMES TJW GR 7,850.0 (2,191.0) 1,077.0
SCULPTOR ACQUISI SCUA/U US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
SHARECARE INC SHCR US 783.7 608.5 336.5
SHELL MIDSTREAM SHLX US 2,329.0 (469.0) 352.0
SHOALS TECHNOL-A SHLS US 382.8 (11.1) 73.1
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBTA GR 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBGI US 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBTA GZ 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBGIEUR EU 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBTA TH 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SINCLAIR BROAD-A SBTA QT 12,845.0 (1,366.0) 1,652.0
SIRIUS XM HO-BDR SRXM34 BZ 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN SIRI US 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN RDO GR 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN RDO TH 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN RDO GZ 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN SIRIEUR EU 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN SIRI AV 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN SIRIEUR EZ 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRIUS XM HOLDIN RDO QT 10,094.0 (2,555.0) (1,796.0)
SIRNAOMICS LTD 2257 HK 110.2 (94.2) 11.0
SIX FLAGS ENTERT 6FE GR 3,054.9 (452.1) 99.8
SIX FLAGS ENTERT SIXEUR EU 3,054.9 (452.1) 99.8
SIX FLAGS ENTERT SIX US 3,054.9 (452.1) 99.8
SIX FLAGS ENTERT 6FE QT 3,054.9 (452.1) 99.8
SIX FLAGS ENTERT 6FE TH 3,054.9 (452.1) 99.8
SKYWATER TECHNOL SKYT US 271.7 85.1 23.1
SLEEP NUMBER COR SL2 TH 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SLEEP NUMBER COR SL2 QT 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SLEEP NUMBER COR SL2 GZ 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SLEEP NUMBER COR SL2 GR 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SLEEP NUMBER COR SNBR US 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SLEEP NUMBER COR SNBREUR EU 883.6 (440.1) (695.6)
SMILEDIRECTCLUB SDC* MM 886.1 (45.7) 387.3
SOFTCHOICE CORP SFTC CN 513.3 45.8 (36.6)
SOFTCHOICE CORP 90Q GR 513.3 45.8 (36.6)
SOFTCHOICE CORP SFTCEUR EU 513.3 45.8 (36.6)
SOFTCHOICE CORP 90Q GZ 513.3 45.8 (36.6)
SONIDA SENIOR LI CSU2EUR EU 674.2 (153.6) (186.5)
SONIDA SENIOR LI 13C0 GZ 674.2 (153.6) (186.5)
SONIDA SENIOR LI SNDA US 674.2 (153.6) (186.5)
SONIDA SENIOR LI 13C0 GR 674.2 (153.6) (186.5)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SW5 GZ 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SWN-RM RM 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SW5 TH 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SW5 GR 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SWN US 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SW5 QT 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SWN1EUR EU 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SOUTHWESTRN ENGY SWN1EUR EZ 9,241.0 (286.0) (3,260.0)
SPRAGUE RESOURCE SRLP US 1,231.6 (101.9) (139.0)
SQUARESPACE -BDR S2QS34 BZ 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A SQSP US 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A 8DT GR 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A 8DT GZ 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A SQSPEUR EU 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A 8DT TH 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
SQUARESPACE IN-A 8DT QT 905.8 (15.9) (41.3)
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX-RM RM 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUXCL CI 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX_KZ KZ 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SRB GR 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SRB TH 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX* MM 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SRB GZ 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX AV 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUXEUR EU 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX TE 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX IM 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUXUSD SW 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX US 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX PE 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX CI 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP TCXSBU AU 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUXEUR EZ 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP 0QZH LI 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SBUX SW 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS CORP SRB QT 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS-BDR SBUB34 BZ 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS-CEDEAR SBUX AR 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
STARBUCKS-CEDEAR SBUXD AR 31,392.6 (5,314.5) 1,605.0
TAILWIND INTERNA TWNI/U US 347.0 (22.0) 1.1
TAILWIND INTERNA TWNI US 347.0 (22.0) 1.1
TALON 1 ACQUIS-A TOAC US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
TALON 1 ACQUISIT TOACU US 0.4 (0.0) (0.4)
TASTEMAKER ACQ-A TMKR US 279.5 254.3 0.4
TASTEMAKER ACQUI TMKRU US 279.5 254.3 0.4
THUNDER BRIDGE C TBCPU US 414.9 394.0 (5.6)
THUNDER BRIDGE-A TBCP US 414.9 394.0 (5.6)
TKB CRITICAL T-A USCT US 0.5 (0.0) (0.5)
TKB CRITICAL TEC USCTU US 0.5 (0.0) (0.5)
TORRID HOLDINGS CURV US 636.3 (214.6) (31.5)
TPG INC TPG US 0.0 (0.0) 0.0
TPG INC B81 GR 0.0 (0.0) 0.0
TPG INC TPG1EUR EU 0.0 (0.0) 0.0
TRANSAT A.T. TRZ CN 1,897.7 (315.1) 89.7
TRANSDIGM - BDR T1DG34 BZ 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP TDG-RM RM 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP TDG US 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP T7D GR 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP TDG* MM 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP T7D TH 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP T7D QT 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP TDGEUR EU 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSDIGM GROUP TDGEUR EZ 19,315.0 (2,910.0) 5,367.0
TRANSPHORM INC TGAN US 14.3 (19.5) (11.7)
TRAVEL + LEISURE WD5A GZ 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE TNL US 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE WD5A GR 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE WD5A TH 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE 0M1K LI 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE WD5A QT 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE WYNEUR EU 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRAVEL + LEISURE WYNEUR EZ 6,601.0 (849.0) 658.0
TRISTAR ACQUISIT TRIS/U US 0.7 (0.1) (0.8)
TRISTAR ACQUISIT TRIS US 0.7 (0.1) (0.8)
TRIUMPH GROUP TG7 GZ 1,800.7 (828.9) 419.4
TRIUMPH GROUP TG7 GR 1,800.7 (828.9) 419.4
TRIUMPH GROUP TGI US 1,800.7 (828.9) 419.4
TRIUMPH GROUP TG7 TH 1,800.7 (828.9) 419.4
TRIUMPH GROUP TGIEUR EU 1,800.7 (828.9) 419.4
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP GR 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP US 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP GZ 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP TH 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP1EUR EU 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP1EUR EZ 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
TUPPERWARE BRAND TUP QT 1,207.7 (223.3) (461.6)
UNISYS CORP USY1 TH 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP USY1 GR 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UIS US 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UIS1 SW 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UISEUR EU 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UISCHF EU 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP USY1 GZ 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP USY1 QT 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UISEUR EZ 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNISYS CORP UISCHF EZ 2,321.4 (250.1) 463.6
UNITI GROUP INC 8XC GZ 4,784.3 (2,118.2) -
UNITI GROUP INC UNIT US 4,784.3 (2,118.2) -
UNITI GROUP INC 8XC GR 4,784.3 (2,118.2) -
UNITI GROUP INC 8XC TH 4,784.3 (2,118.2) -
VAXXINITY INC-A VAXX US 134.9 93.6 73.4
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGR GZ 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGR US 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGR GR 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGREUR EU 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGREUR EZ 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGR TH 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VECTOR GROUP LTD VGR QT 1,536.0 (573.1) 470.3
VENTYX BIOSCIENC VTYX US 148.7 136.9 133.9
VERA THERAPEUTIC VERA US 91.2 85.5 85.7
VERISIGN INC VRSN-RM RM 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRS TH 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRS GR 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRSN US 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRS GZ 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRSNEUR EU 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRSN* MM 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRSNEUR EZ 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC VRS QT 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN INC-BDR VRSN34 BZ 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VERISIGN-CEDEAR VRSN AR 1,814.7 (1,417.6) 216.2
VINCO VENTURES I BBIG US 336.9 (172.0) 137.5
VIVINT SMART HOM VVNT US 2,916.4 (1,709.5) (508.5)
W&T OFFSHORE INC UWV GZ 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
W&T OFFSHORE INC WTI US 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
W&T OFFSHORE INC UWV GR 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
W&T OFFSHORE INC UWV SW 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
W&T OFFSHORE INC WTI1EUR EU 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
W&T OFFSHORE INC UWV TH 1,243.3 (296.9) 2.8
WALDENCAST ACQ-A WALD US 345.7 309.6 0.4
WALDENCAST ACQUI WALDU US 345.7 309.6 0.4
WARBURG PINCUS C WPCA/U US 285.7 (20.6) 1.5
WARBURG PINCUS-A WPCA US 285.7 (20.6) 1.5
WAVERLEY CAPIT-A WAVC US 217.2 (5.2) 2.3
WAVERLEY CAPITAL WAVC/U US 217.2 (5.2) 2.3
WAYFAIR INC- A W US 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A W* MM 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A 1WF QT 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A WEUR EU 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A 1WF GZ 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A 1WF GR 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- A 1WF TH 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WAYFAIR INC- BDR W2YF34 BZ 4,466.2 (1,530.1) 924.7
WEBER INC - A WEBR US 1,551.0 (121.3) 147.9
WINGSTOP INC EWG GZ 260.4 (314.1) 29.5
WINGSTOP INC WING1EUR EU 260.4 (314.1) 29.5
WINGSTOP INC WING US 260.4 (314.1) 29.5
WINGSTOP INC EWG GR 260.4 (314.1) 29.5
WINMARK CORP GBZ GR 55.0 (12.8) 33.6
WINMARK CORP WINA US 55.0 (12.8) 33.6
WORLDWIDE WEBB A WWACU US 0.7 (0.0) (0.7)
WORLDWIDE WEBB-A WWAC US 0.7 (0.0) (0.7)
WW INTERNATIONAL WW US 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WW6 GR 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WW6 TH 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WW6 GZ 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WTWEUR EZ 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WTW AV 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WTWEUR EU 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WW INTERNATIONAL WW6 QT 1,467.9 (491.4) 53.5
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYNN-RM RM 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYR TH 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYNN* MM 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYNN US 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYR GR 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYNNEUR EU 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYR GZ 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYNNEUR EZ 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS LTD WYR QT 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
WYNN RESORTS-BDR W1YN34 BZ 12,607.7 (592.6) 1,569.3
XILIO THERAPEUTI XLO US 120.7 86.4 92.7
YELLOW CORP YEL GZ 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YEL GR 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YELL US 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YEL1 TH 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YEL QT 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YRCWEUR EU 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YELLOW CORP YRCWEUR EZ 2,462.8 (306.2) 309.7
YUM! BRANDS -BDR YUMR34 BZ 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUM-RM RM 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC TGR TH 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC TGR GR 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUM* MM 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC TGR GZ 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUMUSD SW 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUM US 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUMEUR EZ 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUM AV 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC TGR TE 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUMEUR EU 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC TGR QT 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
YUM! BRANDS INC YUM SW 6,419.0 (7,855.0) 707.0
ZETA GLOBAL HO-A ZETA US 354.3 55.8 95.4
*********
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.
TCR subscribers have free access to our on-line news archive.
Point your Web browser to http://TCRresources.bankrupt.com/and use
the e-mail address to which your TCR is delivered to login.
*********
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., Philadelphia, Pa., USA.
Randy Antoni, Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante,
Rousel Elaine Tumanda, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Psyche A. Castillon,
Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo Fernandez, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and
Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2022. 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.
*** End of Transmission ***