TCR_Public/101022mbxBankruptcom

Mercredi 16 déc 2015

TCR_Public/101022.mbx
         T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R             Friday, October 22, 2010, Vol. 14, No. 293                            Headlines6611 SOUTHPOINT: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryAEGIS MORTGAGE: Chapter 11 Liquidation Plan ApprovedALLY FINANCIAL: Board Declares Dividends on Preferred StockALTIMA RESOURCES: Huntington Extends Forbearance to Feb. 16AMERICAN INT’L: Said to Raise $17.8BB in HK IPO of AIA UnitAMR CORP: Fitch Gives Positive OutlookAMTRUST FINANCIAL: Seeks Exclusivity Extension; Draft Plan FormedANTIETAM FUNDING: Files for Chapter 11 in ConnecticutANTIETAM FUNDING: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured CreditorAWAL BANK: Bahrain Lender Files for Chapter 11 in New YorkAWAL BANK: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsBIG BEND: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured CreditorsBLUEWATER HLD: Case Summary & 19 Largest Unsecured CreditorsBRITTANY PLACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsC&D TECHNOLOGIES: To Pursue Ch. 11 if Debt-to-Equity Swap FailsCASCADE FINANCIAL: Says Balance Sheet Restructuring CompletedCELLO ENERGY: Files for Bankruptcy Following Civil JudgmentCELLO ENERGY: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsCHINA INSONLINE: Gets Letter From Nasdaq on Continued ListingCLST HOLDINGS: Posts $666,000 Net Loss in August 31 QuarterCOLONIAL BANCGROUP: BofA Sues FDIC Over Taylor Bean LossesCONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Gets Nod to Hire Epiq as Claims AgentCONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Taps Jones Walker as Bankr. CounselCONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Wants Pachuiski as Delaware CounselCOZUMEL CARIBE: Bankruptcy Court Approves Chapter 15 PetitionCRENSHAW HALL: Case Summary & 9 Largest Unsecured CreditorsCROSSROADS ENTERPRISES: Case Summary & Creditors ListCROWNBROOK DEBCO: Fifth Street Wants Dismissal of Bankruptcy CaseCUSTOM CABLE: Wins Nod to Sell Assets to ComVest CapitalDN & DM: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryDOWNEY FINANCIAL: Adv. Proceeding Ordered for FDIC Refund BattleDYNEGY INC: Board Asks Stockholders to Vote for Sale to BlackstoneEARTHRENEW CORP: Files for Protection from U.S. CreditorsEARTHRENEW CORPORATION: Chapter 15 Case SummaryEARTHRENEW IP: Chapter 15 Case SummaryEMISPHERE TECHNOLOGIES: Files Prospectus on Resale of 8MM SharesEMIVEST AEROSPACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsEQK BRIDGEVIEW: Asks for Court’s OK to Use Cash CollateralESCOM LLC: Selling Sex.com Domain to Clover for $13 MillionFANNIE MAE: Regulator Hires Quinn Emmanuel to Assist in ProbeFIDELITY PROPERTIES: Has Until October 29 to File Chapter 11 PlanFIRST NATIONAL BUILDING: Cases Transferred to W.D. Okla.FORMTECH INDUSTRIES: PBGC Assumes Underfund Pension PlanFRANK ELIOPOULOS: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsFRANKLIN PLACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsFREDDIE MAC: Director Rose Doesn’t Hold Securities YetFREDDIE MAC: Regulator Hires Quinn Emmanuel to Assist in ProbeFREDDIE MAC: Sells 0.375% $5 Bil. 2-Yr. USD Reference NotesGENERAL GROWTH: Plan of Reorganization Confirmed by CourtGENERAL GROWTH: To Distribute Shares on November 1GENERAL MOTORS: Parties File Objections to Old GM Plan OutlineGENERAL MOTORS: To Add Chicago as Mediation LocationGENERAL MOTORS: US TREASURY Wants Unsecureds Plea on « Deal » DeniedGENERAL MOTORS: Wants to Enforce Wind-Down Order on Rose, et al.GOLF PROPERTY: Case Summary & 5 Largest Unsecured CreditorsGTC BIOTHERAPEUTICS: LFB Bids to Take GTC Private at $0.28 ApieceHANGER ORTHOPEDIC: Moody’s Assigns ‘B3′ Rating on $200-Mil. NotesHANGER ORTHOPEDIC: S&P Raises Corporate Credit Rating to ‘BB-’HARRISBURG, PA: Has $330,000 Cash; Faces $1.2MM Payroll Next WeekHORIZON NEVADA: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured CreditorHOST HOTELS: S&P Assigns ‘BB+’ Rating on $500 Mil. Senior NotesINFOLOGIX INC: Discloses NASDAQ Panel Decision to Delist StockINNKEEPERS USA: Midland Opposes Committee Retention of JefferiesJAMES CHEELEY: Case Summary & 15 Largest Unsecured CreditorsJAPAN AIRLINES: Green Wants Surrender of 5th Ave. BuildingJAPAN AIRLINES: In Talks With Lenders for Additional LoansJAPAN AIRLINES: US DOT Tentatively OKs Antitrust Immunity PleaJERRY BURKE: Case Summary & 2 Largest Unsecured CreditorsJOHN CHICKERING, JR.: Case Summary & Creditors ListJOSE MARTINEZ: Case Summary & 17 Largest Unsecured CreditorsJUMBOLAIR INC: Gissy Offers to Buy Defaulted Note for $2 MillionKIMMIK CORPORATION: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryL RAMON BONIN: Still Working on Projections, Wants Plan ExtensionL. STERLING: Case Summary & 11 Largest Unsecured CreditorsLEHMAN BROTHERS: Creditors Back $45 Million SunCal SettlementLIONS GATE: BC Securities Commission Grants Cease Trading PleaLUIS LONGORIA: Case Summary & 16 Largest Unsecured CreditorsM & A LAXMI: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured CreditorsMANHATTAN LOAN: Case Summary & 12 Largest Unsecured CreditorsMARIA SANTOS FRANCO: Case Summary & 13 Largest Unsecured CreditorsMARKET DEVELOPMENT: Chapter 11 Reorganization Case DismissedMARKWEST ENERGY: Moody’s Assigns ‘B1′ Rating to $500 Mil. NotesMASSEY ENERGY: S&P Puts ‘BB-’ Rating to CreditWatch DevelopingMCCLATCHY COMPANY: Reports $12 Million Net Income for 3rd QuarterMEG ENERGY: S&P Raises Corporate Credit Rating to ‘BB’MEREDITH WINBORN: Case Summary & 10 Largest Unsecured CreditorsMERUELO MADDUX: Legendary & Hartland Plans Sent to CreditorsMESA AIR: Creditors Committee to Get Co-Exclusivity for PlanMESA AIR: Disclosure Statement Hearing Postponed to Nov. 10METALDYNE LLC: Moody’s Affirms ‘B1′ Corporate Family RatingMETRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER: Icahn Wants to Buy Debt; Nixes Spyglass DealMICHAEL CHANDLER, SR.: Case Summary & Creditors ListMS GRAND: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsNCD DEVELOPMENT: Files List of 10 Largest Unsecured CreditorsNCD DEVELOPMENT: Files Schedules of Assets & LiabilitiesNCD DEVELOPMENT: Section 341(a) Meeting Scheduled for Nov. 12NCD DEVELOPMENT: Taps Randy Ford Taub as General Bankr. CounselNICHOLASVILLE GREENS: Case Summary & 15 Largest Unsec CreditorsNORTEL NETWORKS: Court Approves $65 Mil. Sale of Switch BusinessNORTEL NETWORKS: Proposes Blade Tech. Indemnification PactNORTEL NETWORKS: Resolves Price Adjustment Dispute With AvayaNORTEL NETWORKS: Sets Cross-Border Claims Settlement RulesNORTH AMERICAN PETROLEUM: Nov. 22 Deadline for Proofs of ClaimNORTHFIELD INVESTMENTS: Case Summary & Creditors ListNOVELOS THERAPEUTIC: Stockholders OKs 200% Increase in SharesNUTRACEA INC: Appoints FTI Consulting as Plan AgentOAK KNOLL: Case Summary & 10 Largest Unsecured CreditorsOLLY’S RETAIL: Parent to Launch Kids’ Clothing Line, Web SiteOMAR SPAHI: Reorganization Case Dismissed at Request of NCBORANGE GROVE: Has Until December 30 to Propose Reorganization PlanPACIFIC AVENUE: Bankruptcy Administrator Forms Creditors CommitteePACIFIC LUMBER: 5th Cir. Says Scopac Noteholders Have Admin. ClaimPARK AVENUE BANK: Okla. Regulator Sues Former Exec, OppenheimerPEARLAND SUNRISE: City Nat’l Bank Suit Transferred to W.D. Tex.PENNYRILE SENIOR: Case Summary & 8 Largest Unsecured CreditorsPETROLEUM & FRANCHISE: Hearing on Further Cash Use Set for Oct. 26POTOMAC ENVIRONMENTAL: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsec CreditorsPREFERRED PROPERTIES: Reorganization Case Converted to Chapter 7PRIUM LAKEWOOD: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsPT-1 COMMUNICATIONS: Claim Order Not « Entered Without a Contest »RADIOSHACK CORP: Fitch Keeps Low-B Ratings, Gives Stable OutlookRANDAZZO PROPERTIES: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured CreditorRAUL VALDERRAMA: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsREALTY FINANCE: Chapter 7 Filing Among OptionsROBINO-BAY COURT: Wants Until October 29 to File SchedulesROCK & REPUBLIC: Has Until Oct. 21 to Justify Non-DisclosureROMEO SANTORO: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured CreditorsROPER BROTHER: Plan Confirmation Hearing Set for November 3SAGECREST FINANCIAL: Antietam Files for Chapter 11 in ConnecticutSELF STORAGE: Failure to File MORs, Cash Use Motion Cue DismissalSIFY TECHNOLOGIES: Gets NASDAQ Deficiency Letter on Late FilingSOUTHWEST EQUITY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummarySTEPHEN JEFFCO: Case Summary & 19 Largest Unsecured CreditorsSYDNEY KING: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryTAMARACK RESORT: Court Denies $2-Million DIP Loan ProposalTAYLOR & BISHOP: Taps MCA Financial as Financial AdvisorTAYLOR BEAN: BofA Sues FDIC Over Mortgage LossesTAYLOR BEAN: Gissy Offers to Buy Jumbolair Note for $2 MillionTF PUERTO RICO: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured CreditorsTIGRENT INC: Consultant Named Interim Chief Financial OfficerTOMKINS PLC: Moody’s Downgrades Ratings on Senior Notes to ‘B2′TOUCH AMERICA: Milbank Settles Document RowTRENTON LAND: Has Until March 31 to Propose Chapter 11 PlanTRIDIMENSION ENERGY: Agrees to Sell Assets to Sanchez ResourcesULTIMATE ESCAPES: Sends E-Mail to Members Regarding Oct 18 AuctionULTIMATE ESCAPES: Accepts Offers for Number of AssetsUNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: Fitch Puts B+/RR3 Rating to $750MM NotesUNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: S&P Puts ‘B’ Rating to $750 Mil. NotesVALENCE TECH: Berg & Berg Loans $2.5 Million at 3.5% Per AnnumVANESSA WHITE: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured CreditorVE&E-NEVADA, LLC: Case Summary & 12 Largest Unsecured CreditorsVERTAFORE INC: Moody’s Assigns ‘Caa1′ Rating to $260 Mil. LoanVERTAFORE INC: S&P Affirms ‘B’ Corporate Credit RatingVITESSE SEMICONDUCTOR: To Hold Annual Meeting on January 19WASHINGTON TIMES: Faces Involuntary Bankruptcy PetitionWASHINGTON TIMES: Involuntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryXODTEC LED: Posts $843,400 Net Loss in August 31 Quarter* Former Greenberg Associate Admits to $500K Theft* High-Yield Bond Defaults in U.S. Remain ‘Well Below Average’* Neuberger’s Distressed Debt Fund Raises $244MM in Share Sale* BOOK REVIEW: The Folklore Of Capitalism                            *********6611 SOUTHPOINT: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary————————————————–Debtor: 6611 Southpoint Parkway, LLC          dba Jacksonville Self Storage        7880 Gate Parkway, Suite 300        Jacksonville, FL 32256Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09093Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville)Judge: Paul M. GlennDebtor’s Counsel: Bradley R. Markey, Esq.                  STUTSMAN, THAMES & MARKEY P.A.                  50 N Laura Street, Suite 1600                  Jacksonville, FL 32202-3614                  Tel: (904) 358-4000                  Fax: (904) 358-4001                  E-mail: BRM@stmlaw.netEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000The Debtor did not file a list of its largest unsecured creditorstogether with its petition.The petition was signed by Mike Ashourian, manager of Milklaine,LLC, Debtor’s managing member.AEGIS MORTGAGE: Chapter 11 Liquidation Plan Approved—————————————————-Aegis Mortgage Corp. gained court approval of its Chapter 11liquidation plan Wednesday, ending an uncharacteristicallycooperative bankruptcy for a mortgage lender capsized by thesubprime crisis, Bankruptcy Law360 reports.According to Law360, Judge Brendan L. Shannon signed off on theplan in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delawareafter the debtors resolved objections by the U.S. Internal RevenueService.                   About Aegis Mortgage CorporationHeadquartered in Houston, Texas, Aegis Mortgage Corporation –http://www.aegismtg.com/– provided mortgage loan products to brokers.The Company together with 10 affiliates filed for Chapter 11protection on Aug. 13, 2007 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 07-11119).Laura Davis Jones, Esq., Henry C. Kevane, Esq., David M.Berthenthal, Esq., at Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP, serve ascounsel to the Debtors.  The Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors is represented by Landis Rath & Cobb LLP.  Aegisdisclosed $138,265,342 in assets and $4,125,470 in liabilities asof the Petition Date.ALLY FINANCIAL: Board Declares Dividends on Preferred Stock———————————————————–The Ally Financial Inc. said its Board of Directors has declaredquarterly dividend payments for certain outstanding preferredstock.  The dividends were declared on Oct. 1, 2010, and arepayable on Nov. 15, 2010.A quarterly dividend payment was declared on the Company’s FixedRate Cumulative Mandatorily Convertible Preferred Stock, Series F-2, of approximately $257 million.  This preferred stock was issuedto the U.S. Department of the Treasury on Dec. 30, 2009.A quarterly dividend payment was also declared on the Company’sFixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series G.  Thedividend totals approximately $45 million, and is payable toshareholders of record as of Nov. 1, 2010.  This series ofpreferred stock was issued to investors in connection with thecompany’s private exchange and cash tender offers, which werecompleted in December 2008.                       About Ally FinancialAlly Financial Inc., formerly GMAC Inc. — http://www.ally.com/– is one of the world’s largest automotive financial servicescompanies.  The Company offers a full suite of automotivefinancing products and services in key markets around the world.Ally’s other business units include mortgage operations andcommercial finance, and the company’s subsidiary, Ally Bank,offers online retail banking products.  With more than$176 billion in assets as of June 30, 2010, Ally operates as abank holding company.Ally’s balance sheet at June 30, 2010, showed $176.802 billion intotal assets and $156.029 billion in total liabilities.GMAC obtained a $17 billion bailout from the U.S. government inexchange for a 56.3% stake.  Private equity firm Cerberus CapitalManagement LP keeps 14.9%, while General Motors Co. owns 6.7%.The Company has tapped Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Citigroup Inc.to advise on a range of issues, including strategic alternativesfor the mortgage business and repayment of taxpayer funds.Ally Financial carries « C » short term issuer credit ratings, and »B » long term issuer credit ratings, all with stable outlook, fromStandard & Poor’s.  It has a « B3″ issuer rating, with stableoutlook, from Moody’s.  It has a « B » issuer default rating, withpositive outlook, from Fitch.ALTIMA RESOURCES: Huntington Extends Forbearance to Feb. 16———————————————————–Altima Resources Ltd. (CA:ARH) (frankfurt:AKC) said HuntingtonNational Bank has agreed to an Amendment to the ForbearanceAgreement with the Company’s wholly owned subsidiary, UnbridledEnergy Corp.  The Bank has agreed to extend the maturity date ofthe outstanding bank loan to February 16, 2011, and to forbearfrom taking any further action until at least February 16, 2011.The original loan of US$3,607,500 was acquired as part of theacquisition of Unbridled Energy Corp. in February 2010.  TheCompany has paid approximately US$3,000,000 towards the loan,leaving the current principal balance at US$654,973.Based in Vancouver, British Columbia, in Canada, Altima ResourcesLtd. — http://www.altimaresources.com/– is a junior energy company engaged in the exploration and development of petroleumand natural gas in Western Canada.AMERICAN INT’L: Said to Raise $17.8BB in HK IPO of AIA Unit———————————————————–Cathy Chan and Bei Hu, writing for Bloomberg News, report thatthree people with knowledge of the matter said AmericanInternational Group Inc. raised about HK$138.3 billion ($17.8billion) selling shares in its main Asian unit, AIA Group Ltd., inthe largest initial public offering in Hong Kong/The sources, who declined to be identified before an officialstatement, told Bloomberg News AIG sold the minimum 5.86 billionexisting shares in AIA that it planned to offer, or a 49% stake,at HK$19.68 apiece.  AIG also exercised an « upsize » option to sell1.17 billion more shares at the same price, increasing the stakeit sold to 58%, the people said.According to Bloomberg, AIG Chief Executive Officer RobertBenmosche, 66, has said that the company would be « well withinstriking distance » of repaying the Federal Reserve after divestingAIA and another non-U.S. unit, American Life Insurance Co.                             About AIGAmerican International Group, Inc. — http://www.aig.com/– is an international insurance organization with operations in more than130 countries and jurisdictions.  AIG companies serve commercial,institutional and individual customers through one of the mostextensive worldwide property-casualty networks of any insurer. Inaddition, AIG companies are leading providers of life insuranceand retirement services around the world.  AIG common stock islisted on the New York Stock Exchange, as well as the stockexchanges in Ireland and Tokyo.In September 2008, AIG experienced a liquidity crunch when itscredit ratings were downgraded below « AA » levels by Standard &Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings.  AIG almostcollapsed under the weight of bad bets it made insuring mortgage-backed securities.  The Company, however, was bailed out by theFederal Reserve, but even after an initial infusion of$85 billion, losses continued to grow.  The later rescue packagesbrought the total to $182 billion, making it the biggest federalbailout in U.S. history.AIG has been working to protect and enhance the value of its keybusinesses, execute an orderly asset disposition plan, andposition itself for the future.  AIG has sold a number of itssubsidiaries and other assets to pay down loans received from theU.S. government, and continues to seek buyers of its assets.AMR CORP: Fitch Gives Positive Outlook————————————–The credit quality and ratings outlook for the largest U.S.airlines remains positive this fall, according to Fitch Ratings’latest ‘Airline Credit Navigator’ report.  More than a year intothe cyclical demand recovery that began to drive improvedoperating results late in 2009, U.S. airlines are again poised toreport solid operating and credit quality trends as third quarter2010 (3Q’10) results roll out this month.  Despite ever-presentrisks of external demand shocks and rising fuel costs, the largestcarriers continue to report progress in their efforts to reduceleverage, generate strong free cash flow and bolster liquidity.’Since M&A activity has picked up substantially with the UnitedAirlines-Continental Airlines merger and Southwest Airlines’ bidto acquire AirTran Holdings, there should be a more sustainablecapacity growth path that will allow the U.S. industry to counterinevitable demand and fuel price shocks more resiliently throughthe next cycle,’ said Bill Warlick, Senior Director at Fitch.According to the report, progress toward leverage reduction andmore consistent cash flow generation has been significant over thelast year, and all of the large carriers now have sufficientliquidity to fund upcoming cash obligations comfortably, absent alarge external demand or fuel price shock.  With the United-Continental merger now closed and the Southwest-AirTran dealexpected to be approved, the industry has now consolidateddramatically from a position of fragmentation and persistentovercapacity just five years ago.Fitch says investors should be focused on any outlook languagethat points to an erosion of full-fare booking trends for theremainder of the year during the airlines’ 3Q’10 earnings calls.More difficult revenue per available seat mile comparisons willinevitably reduce unit revenue growth moving into 2011, but Fitchcontinues to believe that modest industry revenue growth can besupported next year, mainly through diminished but still materialgains in passenger yields.Assuming relatively stable fuel prices over the next year, most ofthe large U.S. carriers are well placed to report positive FCF,allowing them to direct more cash toward debt reduction andcontinuing the process of balance sheet repair at a point in theeconomic cycle when credit quality improvement is essential.Fitch’s U.S. Airlines Ratings:  – United Continental Holdings, Inc.: IDR ‘B-’; Positive Outlook  – Delta Air Lines, Inc.: IDR ‘B-’; Stable Outlook  – AMR Corp./American Airlines, Inc.: IDR ‘CCC’  – US Airways Group, Inc.: IDR ‘CCC’  – Southwest Airlines Co.: IDR ‘BBB’; Stable Outlook  – JetBlue Airways Corp.: IDR ‘B-’; Stable OutlookAMTRUST FINANCIAL: Seeks Exclusivity Extension; Draft Plan Formed—————————————————————–BankruptcyData.com reports that AmTrust Financial and its unitsare asking the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for an extension untilNovember 30, 2010 of their exclusive period to propose a Chapter11 plan and an extension until January 28, 2011, of the exclusiveperiod to solicit acceptances of the plan.According to the report, in their motion for a fourth extension,the Debtors explained that they have had a number of discussionsregarding the development of a plan of reorganization the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors and the holders of the 11.78%senior notes due October 20, 2012.  These discussions haveaddressed possible plan formulation notwithstanding the pendencyof the litigation involving the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.and have yielded a draft plan of reorganization that has beendistributed for comment to the Noteholders and Committee.The Debtors received written comments on the draft plan from theNoteholders on October 19, 2010.  The Debtors are also in theprocess of considering certain issues raised by the Committee.The Debtors, according to BData, say a 30-day plan exclusivityextension will afford the parties a better opportunity to craft aconsensual plan of reorganization for these chapter 11 cases.                      About AmTrust FinancialAmTrust Financial Corp (PINK:AFNL) was the owner of the AmTrustBank.  AmTrust was the seventh-largest holder of deposits in SouthFlorida, with $4.7 billion in deposits and 21 branches.In November 2008, the Office of Thrift Supervision issued a ceaseand desist order requiring AmTrust to improve its capital ratios.AmTrust Financial, together with affiliates that include AmTrustManagement Inc., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection onNovember 30, 2009 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio Case No. 09-21323).  G.Christopher Meyer, Esq., and Sherri Lynn Dahl, Esq., at SquireSanders & Dempsey L.L.P., assist the Debtors in theirrestructuring effort.  Kurtzman Carson Consultants serves asclaims and notice agent.  Attorneys at Hahn Loeser & Parks LLPserve as counsel to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.AmTrust Management estimated $100 million to $500 million inassets and liabilities in its Chapter 11 petition.AmTrust Bank was not part of the Chapter 11 filings.  On Dec. 4,2009, AmTrust Bank was closed by regulators, and the FederalDeposit Insurance Corporation was named receiver.  New YorkCommunity Bank, Westbury, New York, assumed all of the deposits ofAmTrust Bank, pursuant to a deal with the FDIC.ANTIETAM FUNDING: Files for Chapter 11 in Connecticut—————————————————–Antietam Funding LLC sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection(Bankr. D. Conn. 10-52523) on October 20.  Antietam Funding LLCestimated assets of $50 million to $100 million and debts of$100 million to $500 million.Bloomberg News reports that Antietam said its primary asset is aportfolio of life insurance investments.   »Their sole business isto lend monies to finance payments of insurance premiums and, inthe event the borrowers fail to repay the loans, to foreclose onand own the underlying policies, » lawyers for Antietam wrote.Antietam, a subsidiary of hedge fund SageCrest II LLC that filedfor bankruptcy in 2008, seeks to have its Chapter 11 jointlyadministered with that of SageCrest.                      About SageCrest II LLCSageCrest II, LLC, is part of a group of funds that was formed toaddress the financial needs of companies which, due to theconsolidation of the banking and specialty finance sectors, hadbeen shut off from traditional sources of capital.  SC II and itsaffiliates conduct business chiefly through two lines of business:structured finance and real estate investment and development.  Intheir structured finance business, SC II and its units have madeloans to borrowers primarily in five areas: specialty finance;life insurance-related products; corporate; mortgage and realestate products; and specialty auto finance.  For real estateinvestment and development, the debtors have made loans orinvestments in the areas of hospitality, mixed use, multi-family,and commercial.  SC II and its affiliates have typically providedsenior secured, asset-based loans and related products to small-sized and medium-sized businesses that have a significant assetbase and are overlooked by many lenders in the mainstream capitalmarkets.  They have also provided junior or subordinated securedfinancing.Greenwich, Connecticut-based SageCrest Financial, LLC is managedby Windmill Management LLC.  SageCrest and its affiliates providedsecured loans to small and midsized business, specializing inlife-insurance products, real estate finance and auto finance.SageCrest Financial and SageCrest II LLC filed chapter 11petitions on August 17, 2008 (Bankr. Conn. Case Nos. 08-50755 and08-50754), and filings by SageCrest Holdings Limited (Bankr. D.Conn. Case No. 08-50763) and SageCrest Dixon, Inc. (Bankr. D.Conn. Case No. 08-50844), followed.James Berman, Esq., at Zeisler and Zeisler P.C., represents theDebtors in their restructuring efforts.   The Debtors estimatetheir assets at $100 million to $500 million.By orders dated August 27, 2008, and October 30, 2008, the courtapproved the joint administration of SC II’s case with that ofSageCrest Finance, LLC, SageCrest Holdings Limited, and SageCrestDixon, Inc., for administrative purposes.  On October 7, 2008, theUnited States Trustee appointed a committee of equity securityholders, including in its membership defendants Topwater ExclusiveFund III, LLC, and Wood Creek Multi-Asset Fund, LP.  The EquityCommittee is comprised of former investors in SC II with allcommittee members claiming they redeemed their investments in thatdebtor.  Asserting they are creditors — and not equity holders –of SC II, both Topwater and Wood Creek resigned from the EquityCommittee.ANTIETAM FUNDING: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured Creditor———————————————————–Debtor: Antietam Funding, LLC        Three Pickwick Plaza, Suite 400        Greenwich, CT 06830Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-52523Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Connecticut (Bridgeport)Judge: Alan H.W. ShiffDebtor’s Counsel: Douglas J. Buncher, Esq.                  NELIGAN FOLEY LLP                  325 N. St. Paul, Suite 3600                  Dallas, TX 75201                  Tel: (214) 840-5300                  Fax: (214) 840-5301                  E-mail: dbuncher@neliganlaw.comEstimated Assets: $50,000,001 to $100,000,000Estimated Debts: $100,000,001 to $500,000,000The petition was signed by Ralph H. Harrison, III, manager of solemember, SageCrest II, LLC.Debtor-affiliates that filed separate Chapter 11 petitions:        Entity                        Case No.       Petition Date        ——                        ——–       ————-Il Lugano, LLC                        08-50811            08/29/08SageCrest Dixon Inc.                  08-50844            09/11/08SageCrest Finance LLC                 08-50755            08/17/08SageCrest II, LLC                     08-50754            08/17/08Antietam’s Largest Unsecured Creditor:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————AllSettled Partners                –                     $682,30660 Long Ridge Road, Suite 205Stamford, CT 06902AWAL BANK: Bahrain Lender Files for Chapter 11 in New York———————————————————-Awal Bank BSC filed a chapter 11 petition (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 10-15518) in Manhattan, New York on October 21.  The Debtorestimated $50 million to $100 million and debts in excess of$1 billion as of the petition date.Edvard Pettersson at Bloomberg News relates that Awal Bank is aBahrain lender owned by Saudi Arabian Saad Group.  Awal Bank wastaken into administration by Bahrain’s central bank in July 2009after defaulting on loans.  U.S. lawyers for the bank said lastyear that under Bahrain law, Awal’s administrator had two years todecide if the bank should liquidate or be returned to managementand shareholders.Stewart Hey of Charles Russell LLP, as external administrator ofAwal Bank BSC of Bahrain, made a voluntary petition under Chapter15 for the bank in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 09-15923) on Sept. 30, 2009, after the Central Bank of Bahrainplaced the bank in administration on July 30, 2009.  Earlier thisyear, the bank began experiencing a liquidity squeeze, brought onin part, by the global economic crisis.  The bank has ceased tooperate as a going concern since it was place into administration.In the Chapter 15 petition, the bank estimated both assets anddebts at more than $1 billion.Based in Bahrain Awal Bank BSC was principally an investmentcompany that provide wholesale banking services in Bahrainincluding the acceptance of deposits and the making of loans.According to Bloomberg, Saudi banks tightened lending after SaadGroup, owned by billionaire Maan al-Sanea, and another Saudiconglomerate, Ahmad Hamad Al-Gosaibi & Brothers Co., defaulted onloans last year, triggering court battles around the globe.Bloomberg relates that Saad Group began building sewage and storm-water systems in Jeddah in western Saudi Arabia and later expandedinto real estate, health care and banking, including taking astake in HSBC Holdings Plc.AWAL BANK: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors——————————————————–Debtor: Awal Bank, BSC        The Manama Centre        Government Avenue        P.O. Box 1735        Kingdom of BahrainBankruptcy Case No.: 10-15518Type of Business: Awal Bank BSC is principally an investment                  company that provide wholesale banking services                  in Bahrain including the acceptance of deposits                  and the making of loans.Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 21, 2010Bankruptcy Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court                  Southern District of New York (Manhattan)Bankruptcy Judge: Allan L. GropperDebtor’s Counsel: David Molton, Esq.                  Brown Rudnick LLP                  7 Times Square                  Times Square Tower                  New York, NY 10036                  Tel.: (212) 209-4800                  Fax : (212) 209-4801                  Email: dmolton@brownrudnick.comEstimated Assets: $50 million to $100 millionEstimated Debts : More Than $1 billionThe petition was signed by Stewart Hey, in his capacity asrepresentative of Charles Russell, LLP, London, as ExternalAdministrator of Awal Bank, BSC, and not in his personal capacity.Awal Bank’s List of 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors:  Entity/Person               Nature of Claim      Claim Amount  ————-               —————      ————Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank                           UnknownPO Box 929Abu DhabiUnited Arab EmiratesAbu Dhabi Islamic Bank                              UnknownPO Box 313Abu DhabiUnited Arab EmiratesAl Gosaibi Money Exchange                           UnknownPO Box 106Al Khobar 31952Saudi ArabiaBank of Montreal                                    UnknownBayerische Hypo-und                                 UnknownVereinsbank AGBayerische Landesbank/                              UnknownBayern LBBoubyan Bank                                        UnknownCalyon Corporate & Investment                       UnknownCommercial Bank of Kuwait                           UnknownCommercial Bank of Qatar                            UnknownCommerzbank AG formerly                             UnknownDresdner BankCommonwealth Bank of Australia                      UnknownFortis Bank                                         UnknownGulf International Bank                             UnknownHSBC, Australia                                     UnknownHSBC, New York                                      UnknownHSH Nordbank AG                                     UnknownJP Morgan                                           UnknownKuwait Finance House                                UnknownThe International Banking                           UnknownCorp.BIG BEND: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured Creditors——————————————————Debtor: Big Bend Investment Group of Florida, LLC        Attn: Gautham Sampath, Manager        8356 Golden Praire Dr.        Tampa, FL 33647Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-24981Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Tampa)Judge: Catherine Peek McEwenDebtor’s Counsel: Buddy D. Ford, Esq.                  BUDDY D. FORD, P.A.                  115 N. MacDill Avenue                  Tampa, FL 33609-1521                  Tel: (813) 877-4669                  Fax: (813) 877-5543                  E-mail: Buddy@tampaesq.comScheduled Assets: $3,000,000Scheduled Debts: $2,858,000A list of the Company’s six largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/flmb10-24981.pdfThe petition was signed by Gautham Sampath, manager.BLUEWATER HLD: Case Summary & 19 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————Debtor: Bluewater Hld Corp.        60 Kendrick St        Needham, MA 02494Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-21384Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       District of Massachusetts (Boston)Judge: Henry J. BoroffDebtor’s Counsel: Philip C. Silverman, Esq.                  ANDERSON AQUINO LLP                  240 Lewis Wharf                  Boston, MA 02110                  Tel: (617) 723-3600                  Fax: (617) 723-3699                  E-mail: psilverman@andersonaquino.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 19 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/mab10-21384.pdfThe petition was signed by Igor Popov, chief executive officer.BRITTANY PLACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: Brittany Place Associates LLC          fdba Brittany Place Associates Limited Partnership        2812 Erwin Road, Suite 305        Durham, NC 27705Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-08533Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of North Carolina (Wilson)Judge: Stephani W. HumrickhouseDebtor’s Counsel: William P. Janvier, Esq.                  JANVIER LAW FIRM, PLLC                  1101 Haynes Street, Suite 102                  Raleigh, NC 27604                  Tel: (919) 582-2323                  Fax: (919) 582-2301                  E-mail: bill@janvierlaw.comScheduled Assets: $102,646Scheduled Debts: $7,496,878A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/nceb10-08533.pdfThe petition was signed by Robinson O. Everett, Jr.C&D TECHNOLOGIES: To Pursue Ch. 11 if Debt-to-Equity Swap Fails—————————————————————C&D Technologies, Inc. disclosed that as part of its restructuringplan it has commenced an offer to exchange all of its outstanding5.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2025 and 5.50% ConvertibleSenior Notes due 2026 for up to 95% of shares of the Company’scommon stock.  The consummation of the exchange offer isconditioned upon, among other things, at least 95% of theaggregate principal amount of the Notes being tendered and notwithdrawn and the holders of Common Stock approving the exchangeoffer and an amendment to the Company’s certificate ofincorporation authorizing an increase in the number of shares ofCommon Stock.  If all of the Notes are exchanged, theparticipating noteholders will receive their pro rata share of 95%of the issued and outstanding Common Stock of the Companyimmediately following completion of the exchange offer, and theexisting holders of Common Stock will retain 5% of the issued andoutstanding Common Stock of the Company, in each case subject todilution due to securities issued under the Company’s managementincentive plans. In connection with the exchange offer, theCompany filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission aregistration statement on Form S-4, a tender offer statement onSchedule TO and related documents and materials.The exchange offer is an out-of-court method of restructuring theCompany’s indebtedness to address imminent debt repaymentobligations and liquidity issues.  If the exchange offer isunsuccessful, as a result of a failure to satisfy the MinimumTender Condition or otherwise, the Company will be unable to repayits current indebtedness from cash on hand or other assets.Therefore, the Company is simultaneously soliciting holders of theNotes and the existing holders of Common Stock to approve aprepackaged plan of reorganization as an alternative to theexchange offer.  If the restructuring is accomplished through theprepackaged plan of reorganization, 100% of the Notes, plus allaccrued and unpaid interest, will be cancelled, and holders ofNotes will receive their pro rata share of either (i) 95% of thecommon stock of the Company issued under the prepackaged plan (the »New Common Stock »), if the Shareholder Exchange Consent isobtained or (ii) 97.5% of the New Common Stock, subject todilution by any issuance made pursuant to certain shareholderwarrants to purchase 5.0% of the Common Stock (the « ShareholderWarrants »), if the Shareholder Exchange Consent is not obtained.If the restructuring is accomplished through the prepackaged planof reorganization, 100% of the Common Stock will be cancelled, andholders of Common Stock will receive their pro rata share ofeither (i) 5% of the New Common Stock, if the Company’sstockholders approve the Shareholder Exchange Consent or (ii) (x)2.5% of the New Common Stock and (y) Shareholder Warrants, if theCompany’s stockholders do not approve the Shareholder ExchangeConsent.Pursuant and subject to the terms of a restructuring supportagreement that the Company entered into with two entities thatcurrently hold approximately 62% of the Notes, such entitiesagreed to tender their Notes in the exchange offer and vote toaccept the prepackaged plan of reorganization.                        The Exchange OfferPursuant and subject to the terms of the exchange offer, inexchange for each $1,000 of principal amount of Notes validlytendered and accepted by us, holders of Notes will receiveapproximately 3,961.252 shares of our Common Stock uponconsummation of the exchange offer.The exchange offer is scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m., EasternTime, on the later of November 18, 2010, and ten business daysfollowing the effective date of the Registration Statement unlessextended by the Company.  Tendered Notes may be validly withdrawnat any time prior to the expiration time.The Registration Statement has not yet become effective and theNotes may not be exchanged nor may offers to exchange be acceptedprior to the time the Registration Statement becomes effective.This news release shall not constitute an offer to exchange, orthe solicitation of an offer to exchange, nor shall there be anyexchange of such securities in any state in which such offer,exchange, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior toregistration or qualification under the securities laws of anysuch state.  Holders of Notes are strongly advised to read theRegistration Statement, tender offer statement, and other relateddocuments because these documents contain important information.              The Prepackaged Plan of ReorganizationIf the Minimum Tender Condition is not satisfied or if theShareholder Exchange Consent is not obtained, but a sufficientnumber of holders and Notes and holders of a requisite principalamount of Notes vote to accept the prepackaged plan ofreorganization, then the Company will pursue an in-courtrestructuring.  If confirmed, the prepackaged plan ofreorganization would have principally the same effect as if 100%of the holders of Notes had tendered their notes in the exchangeoffer.  To confirm the prepackaged plan of reorganization withoutinvoking the « cram-down » provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,holders of Notes representing at least two-thirds in amount andmore than one-half in number of those who vote and holders of atleast two-thirds in number of outstanding common Stock who votemust vote to accept the plan.                              Other MattersThe Company does not anticipate any interruption in its operationsduring the restructuring regardless of whether the Companyconducts the restructuring pursuant to the exchange offer or theprepackaged plan.  The Company expects to move quickly through thereorganization process with the same commitment to quality,consistency and customer service that has been its hallmark formore than 100 years.Under the proposed restructuring plan, the Company will continueto manufacture its products and service its customers in thenormal course.  All vendors and suppliers will continue to be paidin full under normal terms.  The proposed prepackaged plan ofreorganization provides for all creditor classes, includinggeneral unsecured creditors, to be « unimpaired » – i.e., to be paidin full for all valid, outstanding claims upon consummation of theprepackaged plan of reorganization to the extent they have notbeen paid previously.  Implementation of the transactionscontemplated by the restructuring plan are dependent on a numberof factors and approvals, however, and there can be no assurancethat the treatment of creditors outlined above will not changesignificantly.                      About C&D TechnologiesBased in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, C&D Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:CHP) — http://www.cdtechno.com/– engineers, manufactures, sells and services fully integrated reserve power systems for regulatingand monitoring power flow and providing backup power in the eventof primary power loss until the primary source can be restored.The Company’s balance sheet at July 31, 2010, showed$239.4 million in assets, $251.1 million in total liabilities, anda stockholders’ deficit of $11.7 million.The Company says that its cumulative losses, substantialindebtedness and likely future inability to comply with certaincovenants in the agreements governing its indebtedness, includingamong others, covenants related to continued listing on a nationalautomated stock exchange and future EBITDA requirements, and inaddition, its current current liquidity situation, raisesubstantial doubt as to its ability to continue as a going concernfor a period longer than 12 months from July 31, 2010.On September 14, 2010, the Company entered into a restructuringsupport agreement with two convertible noteholders who togetherhold approximately 56% of the aggregate principal amount of the2005 Notes and the 2006 Notes.  The supporting noteholders haveagreed to a proposed restructuring of the 2005 Notes and the 2006Notes which will be effected through (i) an offer to exchange theoutstanding 2005 Notes and 2006 Notes for up to 95% of theCompany’s common stock, or (ii) a prepackaged plan ofreorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.  TheCompany has agreed to solicit votes from the Company’sstockholders and the holders of the Notes to accept theprepackaged plan concurrently with the exchange offer.The Company also continues to be engaged in active discussionswith lenders under its Credit Facility regarding a restructuringof its capital structure.CASCADE FINANCIAL: Says Balance Sheet Restructuring Completed————————————————————-Cascade Financial Corporation, the parent company of Cascade Bank,has successfully completed a series of balance sheet restructuringtransactions which will immediately put the Company and the Bankin an improved financial position including increased capitalratios and increased net interest margin.  The transactionsincluded the restructuring of the Company’s securities portfolio,prepayment and/or modification of the Company’s Federal Home LoanBank (FHLB) advances, and the purchase of interest rate caps tohedge against rising rates. »In this persistently low interest rate environment there was asizeable amount of negative drag on our balance sheet driven inlarge part by high cost borrowings.  Stronger deposit growth and areduction in the real estate construction loan portfolio over thepast few quarters led to increased on-balance sheet liquiditywhich provided us the opportunity to pursue this deleveragingstrategy, » stated Carol K. Nelson, President and CEO.   »We wereable to monetize gains in our securities portfolio to offset thecost of prepaying the FHLB borrowings.  The end result will shrinkthe balance sheet, improve our capital ratios, reduce interestexpense, improve our net interest margin and have a minimal impacton shareholders’ equity.  These restructuring transactions, whichcommenced late in the third quarter and were completed early inthe fourth quarter, are part of the Company’s overall businessplan to strengthen its financial condition going forward. »In addition to restructuring the securities portfolio to monetizegains, the Company prepaid $80 million in FHLB advances to shrinkthe balance sheet, restructured $159 million of fixed rate FHLBadvances into lower cost floating rate advances to reduce currentinterest expense, and purchased interest rate caps in a likeamount to limit exposure to rising interest rates while preservingthe income benefits from this restructuring.Details of the transactions include the following:  –  The Company used low-yielding interest-earning deposits at      the Federal Reserve Bank to prepay $80 million of FHLB      advances at an average rate of 3.75%, incurring      approximately $4.8 million in prepayment penalties  –  The Company offset the prepayment penalties with      approximately $5.0 million in gains from the sale of      investment securities. In total, the Company sold      approximately $252 million in securities with a weighted      average book yield of 2.0%  –  The Company reinvested substantially all of the proceeds      from the securities sale into new securities with a 0% to      20% risk-weight at an average yield of 2.4%  –  The Company restructured $159 million of long-maturity FHLB       »option » advances, callable quarterly as rates rise, into      floating-rate, option-free borrowings, reducing the current      average rate on the advances by 1.38%  –  The Company purchased a series of interest rate caps      totaling $159 million in notional amount to manage interest      rate risk going forward.  These caps were designed to      protect both net interest margin and shareholder equity from      potential future rising interest rates.The transactions leave the Company with continued high levels ofon-balance sheet liquidity, and bring the Company’s interest raterisk position from highly asset-sensitive closer to a neutralposition towards interest rates.Approximately $1.1 million of the securities gains were recognizedin the third quarter of 2010 and Cascade expects to recognizeapproximately $3.9 million in the fourth quarter of 2010 due tothe timing of the transactions.  All of the approximately $4.8million in prepayment penalty from the retirement of FHLBborrowings will be recognized in the fourth quarter of 2010.In addition to the restructuring transactions, the Company isproactively taking steps to improve its net interest margin andcapitalization by allowing additional non-core funding to run off,further shrinking the balance sheet and removing negative carry,as well as other potential strategies to further reduce fundingcosts. »This remains a highly challenging operating environment forcommunity banks, » added Nelson.   »This strategy has allowed us toimprove our net interest margin and capital position, and reducedour reliance on non-core funding while maintaining a prudentinterest rate risk profile, all of which are critical goals forthe Company. »As previously announced, under a Consent Order with the FDIC andWashington State DFI, effective July 21, 2010, Cascade Bank’sregulators have directed Cascade Bank to increase its overallcapital levels and, in particular, are requiring Cascade Bank toincrease its Tier 1 leverage capital to 10% of the Bank’s totalassets and total risk based capital to 12% of the Bank’s riskweighted assets by November 18, 2010.  The Company’s ability toraise additional capital will depend on conditions in the capitalmarkets at that time, which are outside its control, and on theCompany’s financial performance.Sandler O’Neill + Partners, L.P. served as advisor to CascadeFinancial in developing and implementing the balance sheetrestructuring strategies.                    About Cascade FinancialEstablished in 1916, Cascade Bank, the only operating subsidiaryof Cascade Financial Corporation, is a state chartered commercialbank headquartered in Everett, Washington.  Cascade Bank maintainsan « Outstanding » CRA rating and has proudly served the Puget Soundregion for over 90 years. Cascade Bank operates 22 full servicebranches in Everett, Lynnwood, Marysville, Mukilteo, Shoreline,Smokey Point, Issaquah, Clearview, Woodinville, Lake Stevens,Bellevue, Snohomish, North Bend, Burlington and Edmonds.CELLO ENERGY: Files for Bankruptcy Following Civil Judgment———————————————————–Cello Energy LLC filed for Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. S.D. Ala.Case No. 10-04877) on October 19, 2010, in Mobile, Alabama.  Itestimated assets of less than $50,000 and liabilities of$10 million to $50 million.Carla Main at Bloomberg News reports that the largest of theunsecured creditors is Parsons & Whittemore Enterprises Corp.,which is owed $10.4 million.  Rye, New York-based Parsons &Whittemore Enterprises obtained a certificate of judgment Sept. 29in the U.S. District Court in Mobile for $10.4 million againstCello Energy in a lawsuit it brought against the energy company in2007.  Parsons & Whitmore Enterprises sued Cello Energy over aninvestment it made « for the exclusive right to participate » withCello Energy « in the commercial development of technology thatallows the production of synthetic fuels from cellulosic andpolymer-based material, » according to the complaint.  The civilcase is Parsons & Whittemore Enterprises Corp. v. Cello EnergyLLC, 07-00743 (S.D. Ala.).A meeting of creditors in the bankruptcy case is scheduled forNov. 23 at the bankruptcy courthouse in Mobile.Marcus E. McDowell, Esq. — mmcdowell@wbblaw.com — inBay Minette, Alabama, serves as counsel to the Debtor.CELLO ENERGY: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————–Debtor: Cello Energy, LLC        P.O. Box 39        Daphne, AL 36526Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-04877Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Southern District of Alabama (Mobile)Debtor’s Counsel: Marcus E. McDowell, Esq.                  P.O. Box 400                  Bay Minette, AL 36507                  Tel: (251) 937-7024                  Fax: (251) 937-6190                  E-mail: mmcdowell@wbblaw.comEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/alsb10-04877.pdfThe petition was signed by Jack W. Boykin.CHINA INSONLINE: Gets Letter From Nasdaq on Continued Listing————————————————————-China INSOnline Corp. received a letter from Nasdaq regarding itscontinued listing status, also provided an update on thepreviously announced transaction with Dingneng Bio-Technology Co.Ltd. (« Dingneng »).On October 15, 2010, China INSOnline Corp. received a letter fromNasdaq Listing Qualifications indicating that based on theCompany’s disclosures included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K,filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 13,2010, which states that the Company ceased operations during thequarter ended June 30, 2010, the Nasdaq Staff has determined thatthe Company is a « public shell » and it is unknown what theCompany’s business will be in the future.  Therefore, inaccordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5101, the Nasdaq Staff isapplying more stringent criteria than required for the continuedlisting on the Nasdaq Stock Market and is proposing that tradingin the Company’s common stock be suspended as of October 26, 2010and delisted thereafter.  On October 20, 2010, the Companypresented a request for a written hearing to appeal the NasdaqStaff’s proposed actions.  This request has stayed the suspensionand delisting of the Company’s common stock pending a decision.Additionally, Dingneng Bio-Technology Co. Ltd. has retained MaximGroup, a New York based investment banking, securities andinvestment management firm to represent Dingneng in the previouslyannounced transaction to acquire common shares of CHIO throughmerger, direct exchange or any other form in one or a series ofmutually agreed upon transactions.  CHIO is currently workingclosely with Maxim and other professionals to proceed forward onsuch proposed transaction.                   About China INSOnline Corp.China INSOnline Corp. is a Delaware corporation that currentlydoes not have any operations.  During the quarter ended June 30,2010, the Company began winding down and did not have anyoperating income. The weak economic market, which resulted in asignificant decline in revenues of all areas of the Company’sbusiness, led to the Company’s decision to wind down itsoperations.  Prior to winding down, the Company acted as anInternet services and media company focused on the PRC insuranceindustry.CLST HOLDINGS: Posts $666,000 Net Loss in August 31 Quarter———————————————————–CLST Holdings, Inc., filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q,reporting a net loss of $666,000 for the three months endedAugust 31, 2010, compared with a net loss of $1.2 million for thesame period ended August 31, 2009.Revenues, which primarily consist of interest and other chargesearned from the Company’s receivable portfolios, were $1.3 millionfor the three months ended August 31, 2010, compared to$1.8 million for the same period in 2009.The Company’s balance sheet at August 31, 2010, showed$39.6 million in total assets, $40.8 million in total liabilities,and a stockholders’ deficit of $1.2 million.As reported in the Troubled Reporter on March 15, 2010, WhitleyPenn LLP, in Dallas, Tex., expressed substantial doubt about theCompany’s ability to continue as a going concern, following theCompany’s results for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2009.The independent auditors noted that the Company has incurred netlosses in the past two years, has a working capital deficit atNovember 30, 2009, is in default related to its CLST Asset I debtobligation as of November 30, 2009, and continues to incursignificant general and administrative expenses related to itsongoing litigation.A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available for free at:               http://researcharchives.com/t/s?6ccb                       About CLST HoldingsCLST Holdings, Inc. (OTC: CLHI) does not have significantoperations.  Previously, it operated as a distributor of wirelessproducts and provider of distribution and value-added logisticsservices to the wireless communications industry, serving networkoperators, agents, resellers, dealers, and retailers withoperations in the North American and Latin American Regions.  Thecompany was formerly known as CellStar Corporation and changed itsname to CLST Holdings, Inc. in March 2007.  CLST Holdings, Inc.was founded in 1981 and is based in Dallas, Texas.On March 26, 2010 the Company filed a certificate of dissolutionwith the Delaware Secretary of State which became effective onJune 24, 2010.  As a result of the effectiveness of thecertificate of dissolution, the Company was dissolved and, exceptto the limited extent provided for by Delaware law, its corporateexistence ceased.  The corporation has three years to liquidateits assets, prosecute and defend suits, satisfy or provide for itsliabilities, including contingent liabilities, to the extent ofthe corporation’s assets, and distribute the net proceeds or theassets in kind, if any, to its stockholders.  During this timeperiod, the corporation must cease to carry on the business forwhich it was established, except as may be necessary or incidentalto the winding up of the corporation’s affairs.The Company expects that it could take a couple of years for theCompany to complete its plan of dissolution and make finalliquidating distributions to its stockholders.COLONIAL BANCGROUP: BofA Sues FDIC Over Taylor Bean Losses———————————————————-Karen Gullo, writing for Bloomberg News, reports that Bank ofAmerica Corp. sued the Federal Insurance Deposit Corp. (D. D.C.Case No. 10-01681) over $1.75 billion in investor losses stemmingfrom an alleged fraud by Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp.Ms. Gullo reports that the FDIC has denied claims by BofA againstColonial Bank and another financial institution in receivershipthat bought fake mortgages from a Taylor Bean unit, Ocala FundingLLC, according to a complaint filed Oct. 1 in federal court inWashington.  BofA was the trustee for notes issued by OcalaFunding, according to the complaint.According to the report, BofA said Ocala financed Taylor Bean’smortgages, issued debt and used the proceeds to buy the mortgages.Ocala then sold the notes to pay off the debt or buy additionalmortgages, according to the compliant.  BofA alleged that from2000 to 2009, Taylor Bean and Colonial Bank schemed to steal fromTaylor Bean’s borrowing facilities to hide liquidity problems.                 About The Colonial BancGroupHeadquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, The Colonial BancGroup,Inc., (NYSE: CNB) owned Colonial Bank, N.A, its bankingsubsidiary.  Colonial Bank — http://www.colonialbank.com/– operated 354 branches in Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Nevada andTexas with over $26 billion in assets.  On August 14, 2009,Colonial Bank was seized by regulators and the Federal DepositInsurance Corporation was named receiver.  The FDIC sold most ofthe assets to Branch Banking and Trust, Winston-Salem, NorthCarolina.  BB&T acquired $22 billion in assets and assumed$20 billion in deposits of the Bank.The Colonial BancGroup filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection(Bankr. M.D. Ala. Case No. 09-32303) on August 25, 2009.  W. ClarkWatson, Esq., at Balch & Bingham LLP, and Rufus T. Dorsey IV,Esq., at Parker Hudson Rainer & Dobbs LLP, assist the Debtor inits restructuring effort.  In its schedules, the Debtor disclosed$45 million in total assets and $380 million in total liabilitiesas of the Petition Date.                          About Taylor BeanTaylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. grew from a small Ocala-based mortgage broker to become one of the largest mortgagebankers in the United States.  In 2009, Taylor Bean was thecountry’s third largest direct-endorsement lender of FHA-insuredloans of the largest wholesale mortgage lenders and issuer ofmortgage backed securities.  It also managed a combined mortgageservicing portfolio of approximately $80 billion.  The companyemployed more that 2,000 people in offices located throughout theUnited States.Taylor Bean filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection August 24(Bankr. M.D. Fla. Case No. 09-07047).  Taylor Bean filed theChapter 11 petition three weeks after federal investigatorssearched its offices.  The day following the search, the FederalHousing Administration, Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac prohibited thecompany from issuing new mortgages and terminated servicingrights.  Taylor Bean estimated more than $1 billion in both assetsand liabilities in its bankruptcy petition.  Edward J. Peterson,III, Esq., at Stichter, Riedel, Blain & Prosser, PA, in Tampa,Florida, represents the Debtor.  Troutman Sanders LLP is specialcounsel.  BMC Group, Inc., serves as claims agent.CONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Gets Nod to Hire Epiq as Claims Agent—————————————————————-Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC, et al., sought and obtainedauthorization from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District ofDelaware to employ Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions, Inc., as claims,noticing and balloting agent.Epiq will, among other things:     a. transmit certain notices;     b. receive, docket, scan, maintain and photocopy claims filed        against the Debtors;     c. assist the Debtors in the distribution of solicitation        materials; and     d. receive, review and tabulate ballots cast in accordance        with voting procedures approved by the Court.The hourly rates of Epiq’s personnel are:        Clerk                                  $40-$60        Case Manager (Level 1)                $125-$175        IT Programming Consultant             $140-$190        Case Manager (Level 2)                $185-$220        Senior Case Manager                   $225-$275        Senior Consultant                       $295A copy of the services agreement is available for free at:               http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?6cccDaniel C. McElhinney, Epiq’s executive director, assures the Courtthat the firm is a « disinterested person » as that term is definedin Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.                       About Hines NurseriesIrvine, California-based Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC,doing business as Hines Nurseries LLC –http://www.hineshorticulture.com/– operates nursery facilities located in Arizona, California, Oregon and Texas.  Through itsaffiliate, the company produces and distributes horticulturalproducts.Black Diamond Capital Management LLC purchased HinesNurseries Inc. in a bankruptcy sale in January 2009.  Theresulting reorganization plan, confirmed in January 2009, paidsecured creditors in full on their $35.9 million in claims whileproviding as much as $12 million toward debt owing to suppliersboth before and after the bankruptcy filing.  The business boughtby Black Diamond was renamed to Consolidated Horticulture.Consolidated Horticulture and its affiliates filed for Chapter 11protection on October 12, 2010 (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No.10-13308).  Laura Davis Jones, Esq. and Timothy P. Cairns, Esq. atPachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP serve as Delaware counsel to theDebtors.  Attorneys at Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere& Denegre, L.L.P., serve as bankruptcy counsel.  The Debtorstapped Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions LLC as claims agent.Consolidated Horticulture estimated $100 million to $500 millionin assets and $50 million to $100 million in debts in theChapter 11 petition.CONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Taps Jones Walker as Bankr. Counsel————————————————————–Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC, et al., ask for authorizationfrom the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware toemploy Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre,L.L.P., as bankruptcy counsel in connection with the Debtors’Chapter 11 cases, nunc pro tunc to the Petition Date.The Debtors are also asking for the Court’s permission to employPachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP as Delaware counsel.  JonesWalker doesn’t maintain an office in the State of Delaware.  Tocomply with Local Rule 9010-1(c), the Debtors are required toretain a Delaware counsel.  The Debtors also seek to employ andretain PSZJ as their conflicts counsel in connection with theDebtors’ Chapter 11 cases to handle matters that the Debtors mayencounter that cannot be appropriately handled by Jones Walkerbecause of a conflict of interest or alternatively, that can bemore efficiently handled by PSZJ.Jones Walker will, among other things:     a. advise and consult the Debtors on the conduct of the        Chapter 11 cases, including all of the legal and        administrative requirements of operating in Chapter 11;     b. attend meetings and negotiate with representatives of        creditors and other parties in interest;     c. represent the Debtors in connection with obtaining        postpetition financing; and     d. advise the Debtors in connection with any potential        Section 363 sale or sale of assets.The hourly rates of Jones Walker’s personnel are:        Associates                         $165-$250        Partners                           $275-$425Elizabeth J. Futrell, Esq., a partner at Jones Walker, assures theCourt that the firm is a « disinterested person » as that term isdefined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.                       About Hines NurseriesIrvine, California-based Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC,doing business as Hines Nurseries LLC –http://www.hineshorticulture.com/– operates nursery facilities located in Arizona, California, Oregon and Texas.  Through itsaffiliate, the company produces and distributes horticulturalproducts.Black Diamond Capital Management LLC purchased HinesNurseries Inc. in a bankruptcy sale in January 2009.  Theresulting reorganization plan, confirmed in January 2009, paidsecured creditors in full on their $35.9 million in claims whileproviding as much as $12 million toward debt owing to suppliersboth before and after the bankruptcy filing.  The business boughtby Black Diamond was renamed to Consolidated Horticulture.Consolidated Horticulture and its affiliates filed for Chapter 11protection on October 12, 2010 (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No.10-13308).  The Debtors tapped Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions LLC asclaims agent.  Consolidated Horticulture estimated $100 million to$500 million in assets and $50 million to $100 million in debts inthe Chapter 11 petition.CONSOLIDATED HORTICULTURE: Wants Pachuiski as Delaware Counsel————————————————————–Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC and its debtor-affiliates askfor authorization from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Districtof Delaware to employ Pachuiski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP asDelaware and conflicts counsel, nunc pro tunc to the PetitionDate.The Debtors are also asking for the Court’s permission to employJones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre, L.L.P., asbankruptcy counsel.  Jones Walker doesn’t maintain an office inthe State of Delaware.PSZ&J will, among other things:     a. prepare applications, motions, answers, orders, reports,        and other legal papers;     b. appear in Court on behalf of the Debtors;     c. prepare and pursue confirmation of a plan and approval of        a disclosure statement; and     d. perform other legal services for the Debtors that may be        necessary and proper in these proceedings.The hourly rates of PSZ&J’s personnel are:        Laura Davis Jones                      $855        David M. Bertenthal                    $750        Joshua M. Fried                        $625        Timothy P. Cairns                      $450        Patricia E. Cuniff                     $225Laura Davis Jones, Esq., at PSZ&J, assures the Court that the firmis a « disinterested person » as that term is defined in Section101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.                       About Hines NurseriesIrvine, California-based Consolidated Horticulture Group LLC,doing business as Hines Nurseries LLC –http://www.hineshorticulture.com/– operates nursery facilities located in Arizona, California, Oregon and Texas.  Through itsaffiliate, the company produces and distributes horticulturalproducts.Black Diamond Capital Management LLC purchased HinesNurseries Inc. in a bankruptcy sale in January 2009.  Theresulting reorganization plan, confirmed in January 2009, paidsecured creditors in full on their $35.9 million in claims whileproviding as much as $12 million toward debt owing to suppliersboth before and after the bankruptcy filing.  The business boughtby Black Diamond was renamed to Consolidated Horticulture.Consolidated Horticulture and its affiliates filed for Chapter 11protection on October 12, 2010 (Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No.10-13308).  Laura Davis Jones, Esq. and Timothy P. Cairns, Esq. atPachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP serve as Delaware counsel to theDebtors.  Attorneys at Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere& Denegre, L.L.P., serve as bankruptcy counsel.  The Debtorstapped Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions LLC as claims agent.Consolidated Horticulture estimated $100 million to $500 millionin assets and $50 million to $100 million in debts in theChapter 11 petition.COZUMEL CARIBE: Bankruptcy Court Approves Chapter 15 Petition————————————————————-Dow Jones’ DBR Small Cap reports Cozumel Caribe SA won permissionto proceed with its bankruptcy case in the U.S., despite earlieropposition to the move.According to the report, Judge Martin Glenn of the U.S. BankruptcyCourt in Manhattan Tuesday signed off on an order grantingrecognition of Cozumel Caribe’s case under Chapter 15 of thebankruptcy code, the arm designed for foreign companies that haveunits or assets in the U.S. Cozumel Caribe initiated its Mexicaninsolvency proceedings this spring before filing its request forChapter 15 protection in Manhattan in July.But, the report notes, its pursuit of recognition in the U.S. wasmet with roadblocks.  First, the special servicer of $103 millionin notes issued by Cozumel Caribe sought to block the bid, thereport adds.                        About Cozumel CaribeCozumel Caribe SA de CV, a Mexican provider of tourism services ata beachfront hotel in Cozumel, sought protection from creditorsunder Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 10-13913) in Manhattan New York on July 20, 2010.  Cozumelfiled for Chapter 15 to seek recognition of its Mexican insolvencyproceedings commenced a few months before the U.S. filing.Cozumel Caribe reported more than US$100 million in debts andassets of more than US$10 million in its bankruptcy petition.CRENSHAW HALL: Case Summary & 9 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————–Debtor: Crenshaw Hall Properties LLC        2408 Trusty Trail        Raleigh, NC 27615Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-08526Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of North Carolina (Wilson)Judge: Stephani W. HumrickhouseDebtor’s Counsel: N. Hunter Wyche, Jr., Esq.                  WILSON & RATLEDGE PLLC                  4600 Marriott Drive, Suite 400                  Raleigh, NC 27612                  Tel: (919) 787-7711                  Fax: (919) 787-7710                  E-mail: hwyche@wilsonandratledge.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s nine largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/nceb10-08526.pdfThe petition was signed by John Bennett, manager.CROSSROADS ENTERPRISES: Case Summary & Creditors List—————————————————–Debtor: Crossroads Enterprises, Inc.        P.O. Box 2549        Bentonville, AR 72712Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-75464Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Western District of Arkansas (Fayetteville)Debtor’s Counsel: Stanley V. Bond, Esq.                  ATTORNEY AT LAW                  P.O. Box 1893                  Fayetteville, AR 72701-1893                  Tel: (479) 444-0255                  Fax: (479) 444-7141                  E-mail: attybond@me.comEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s three largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/arwb10-75464.pdfThe petition was signed by Barry Cooksey, president/CEO.CROWNBROOK DEBCO: Fifth Street Wants Dismissal of Bankruptcy Case—————————————————————–Fifth Street Finance Corp. is urging a judge to dismiss thebankruptcy case of Nicos Polymers Group, arguing that the companyentered Chapter 11 as a « last-minute delay tactic » aimed atpreventing the lender from holding a foreclosure auction, DowJones’ DBR Small Cap reports.According to the report, Fifth Street said in court papers that itand one of its mezzanine funds are owed $20.3 million and thatthey are secured by all of Nicos’s assets. Fifth Street hadscheduled a foreclosure auction to take place Oct. 14 afterspending years refraining from taking action after Nicos’s »multiple, material, events of default. »However, the report says, the auction was automatically haltedwhen Nicos entered bankruptcy the day before.  Fifth Street saidthat based on Nicos’s financial projections, it sees no scenarioin which the company could pay off what it owes the specialtyfinance company or $500,000 in general unsecured trade debt, thereport adds.Crownbrook Debco, LLC, dba Nicos Polymers Group, filed for Chapter11 protection (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-15345) on Oct. 13, 2010in Manhattan.  Samuel Jason Teele, Esq., at Lowenstein Sandler,P.C., in New Jersey, serves as counsel to the Debtor.  The Debtorestimated assets of $1,000,001 to $10,000,000 and debts of$10,000,001 to $50,000,000 in its Chapter 11 petition.CUSTOM CABLE: Wins Nod to Sell Assets to ComVest Capital——————————————————–Dow Jones’ DBR Small Cap reports that ComVest Capital LLC has wonthe green light to purchase the assets of Custom Cable IndustriesInc.Comvest Ltd. Inc. — http://www.comvestltd.com/– is a privately held firm involved in providing flexible and innovative tax-exemptfinancing solutions in the mid-Atlantic region.Founded in 1980, Custom Cable Industries, Inc. –http://www.customcable.com/– manufactures and installs audio, video and fiber-optic cables.Custom Cable filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr.M.D. Fla. Case No. 10-18478) on July 30, 2010.  Michael P. Horan,Esq., and Stephanie C. Lieb, Esq., at Trenam Kemker Scharf BarkinFrye, serve as the Debtor’s bankruptcy counsel.  The Debtorestimated $1 million to $10 million in assets and $10 million to$50 million in debts in the Chapter 11 petition.DN & DM: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary——————————————Debtor: DN & DM Holdings, LLC        42561 North Back Creek Way        Anthem, AZ 85066Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33400Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Arizona (Phoenix)Judge: Charles G. Case, IIDebtor’s Counsel: Robert Lynn Larson, Esq.                  LARSON LAW OFFICE PLLC                  207 N. Gilbert Road, #001                  Gilbert, AZ 85234                  Tel: (480) 459-6080                  Fax: (480) 304-3150                  E-mail: robert@robertlarsonlaw.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000The Company did not file a list of creditors together with itspetition.The petition was signed by Daniel Miller, member/manager/generalpartner.DOWNEY FINANCIAL: Adv. Proceeding Ordered for FDIC Refund Battle—————————————————————-Bankruptcy Law360 reports that a bankruptcy judge Wednesdayordered a trial to determine whether the Federal Deposit InsuranceCorp. or the estate of Downey Financial Corp. owns a $370 milliontax refund, the single biggest asset in the defunct lender’sChapter 7 case.Judge Christopher S. Sontchi of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theDistrict of Delaware agreed with the FDIC that an adversaryproceeding was the proper venue for the dispute, Law360 says.Downey Financial Corp. filed a Chapter 7 petition (Bankr. D. Del.08-13041) on Nov. 25, 2008, after the Office of Thrift Supervisionclosed Downey Savings & Loan Association, F.A., on Nov. 21, 2008,and appointed the FDIC as receiver.  Montague S. Claybrook servesas the Chapter 7 Trustee, and is represented by William H.Stassen, Esq., at Fox Rothschild LLP.DYNEGY INC: Board Asks Stockholders to Vote for Sale to Blackstone——————————————————————Dynegy Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission anupdate to its investor presentation that clarifies certainmisconceptions and contains additional important facts related tomerger agreement with an affiliate of The Blackstone Group L.P.,pursuant to which a Blackstone affiliate will acquire Dynegy for$4.50 in cash per share of Dynegy common stock.The Company said this update addresses, among other things:   * The reasons why Dynegy is currently in no position to pay a     dividend to stockholders, and how under no scenario as a     public company would Dynegy’s Board of Directors be able to     sell substantial assets at current valuation levels and     dividend the sale proceeds to stockholders;   * The fact that Dynegy’s Board carefully considered and decided     not to pursue the sale of various asset packages on a stand-     alone basis because it would have added significant     additional financial and operating risk to Dynegy and its     stockholders;   * Analysis from independent sell-side analysts and rating     agencies that provides support for the Dynegy Board’s     conclusion that the Blackstone transaction is the best     alternative available to Dynegy’s stockholders;   * The fact that Dynegy’s future financial position could be     even worse than what has been forecasted, in light of     deteriorating market conditions and other factors; and   * The significant downside risk to Dynegy stockholders should     the Blackstone transaction not be approved and completed.Dynegy’s Board of Directors recommends stockholders vote for themerger agreement with Blackstone at November 17, 2010 SpecialMeeting of Stockholders.A full-text copy of the Investor Presentation is available forfree at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?6cc3                         About Dynegy Inc.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, DHI is an independent powerproducer that owns a portfolio of more than 12,000 MW electricgenerating assets.  DHI is wholly-owned by Dynegy, Inc.Dynegy Inc. and Dynegy Holdings each has a ‘B-’ issuer defaultrating from Fitch.In October 2010, Moody’s Investors Service lowered the ratings ofDynegy Holdings, including its Corporate Family Rating to Caa1from B3 along with the ratings of various affiliates or parentcompany Dynegy Inc.  The rating outlook for DHI and Dynegy remainsnegative.  The rating action follows the expiration of the 40- day »go shop » period, increasing the probability that Dynegy will beacquired by an affiliate of The Blackstone Group L.P. in atransaction valued at approximately $4.7 billion, including theassumption of existing debt.EARTHRENEW CORP: Files for Protection from U.S. Creditors———————————————————EarthRenew Management General Partner Ltd. filed for protectionfrom U.S. creditors under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code(Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 10-13366) on October 20 in Wilmington,Delaware.EarthRenew Management is a Canadian company providing corporatefinance services to rural based businesses.  Under Chapter 15 ofthe U.S. Bankruptcy Code, companies can block U.S. lawsuits whilethey reorganize in a foreign court.  The Debtor estimated assetsof less than $50,000 and liabilities of $1 million to $10 millionin the Chapter 15 petition.Affiliates of Calgary, Alberta-based EarthRenew also filed forChapter 15, and the Debtors have requested joint administration ofthe cases.According to Bloomberg News, the bankrupt affiliates includeEarthRenew IP Holdings LLC, EarthRenew Corp., EarthRenew Inc.,EarthRenew Management LP, EarthRenew Operational Employee LP, andEarthRenew Strathmore General Partner Ltd.EARTHRENEW CORPORATION: Chapter 15 Case Summary———————————————–Chapter 15 Petitioner: Robert J. TaylorChapter 15 Debtor: EarthRenew Corporation                     aka EarthRenew Organics Ltd.                   1925 18th Avenue N.E., Suite 201                   Calgary, Alberta T2E 7T8                   CanadaChapter 15 Case No.: 10-13364Type of Business: The Debtor is an organic matter fertilizer                  company.Chapter 15 Petition Date: October 20, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Delaware (Delaware)Judge: Christopher S. SontchiDebtor’s Counsel: Michael R. Nestor, Esq.                  YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR                  The Brandywine Building                  1000 West Street, 17th Floor                  P.O. Box 391                  Wilmington, DE 19899                  Tel: (302) 571-6600                  Fax: (302) 571-1253                  E-mail: bankfilings@ycst.comEstimated Assets: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000Estimated Assets: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000The Company did not file a list of creditors together with itspetition.Debtor-affiliates filing separate Chapter 15 petitions:    – EarthRenew IP Holdings LLC    – EarthRenew, Inc.    – EarthRenew Management General Partner Ltd    – EarthRenew Management LP    – EarthRenew Operational Employee LP    – EarthRenew Solutions LP    – EarthRenew Strathmore 1 LP    – EarthRenew Strathmore General Partner Ltd.EARTHRENEW IP: Chapter 15 Case Summary————————————–Chapter 15 Petitioner: Robert J. TaylorChapter 15 Debtor: EarthRenew IP Holdings LLC                   3500 South Dupont Highway                   Dover, DE 19901Chapter 15 Case No.: 10-13363Chapter 15 Petition Date: October 20, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Delaware (Delaware)Judge: Christopher S. SontchiDebtor’s Counsel: Michael R. Nestor, Esq.                  Donald J. Bowman, Jr., Esq.                  YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR                  The Brandywine Building                  1000 West Street, 17th Floor                  P.O. Box 391                  Wilmington, DE 19899                  Tel: (302) 571-6600                  Fax: (302) 571-1253                  E-mail: bankfilings@ycst.comEstimated Assets: $500,001 to $1,000,000Estimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000The Company did not file a list of creditors together with itspetition.Debtor-affiliates filing separate Chapter 15 petitions:    – EarthRenew Corporation    – EarthRenew IP Holdings LLC    – EarthRenew, Inc.    – EarthRenew Management General Partner Ltd    – EarthRenew Management LP    – EarthRenew Operational Employee LP    – EarthRenew Solutions LP    – EarthRenew Strathmore 1 LP    – EarthRenew Strathmore General Partner Ltd.EMISPHERE TECHNOLOGIES: Files Prospectus on Resale of 8MM Shares—————————————————————-Emisphere Technologies Inc. filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission a prospectus relating to the offer for sale by existingholders of its common stock of 8,140,496 shares of the Company’scommon stock, par value $0.01 per share, including 3,488,784shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the warrants heldby the selling security holders.According to the Company, it is anticipated that the sellingsecurity holders will sell these shares of common stock from timeto time in one or more transactions, in negotiated transactions orotherwise, at prevailing market prices or at prices otherwisenegotiated.  The Company will not receive any proceeds from thesales.  The Company, however, will pay all fees and expensesincurred incident to the registration of the common stock,including SEC filing fees.  Each selling security holder will beresponsible for all costs and expenses in connection with the saleof their shares of common stock, including brokerage commissionsor dealer discounts.The selling shareholders are Bai Ye Feng; Anson Investments MasterFund LP; Iroquois Master Fund, Ltd.; Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd.;and Cranshire Capital, L.P.; Freestone Advantage Partners, LP.A copy of the prospectus dated October 13 is available at nocharge at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?6cc9                   About Emisphere TechnologiesBased in Cedar Knolls, New Jersey, Emisphere Technologies, Inc.(OTC BB: EMIS) — http://www.emisphere.com/– is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on a unique and improveddelivery of pharmaceutical compounds and nutritional supplementsusing its Eligen(R) Technology.  The Eligen(R) Technology can beapplied to the oral route of administration as well other deliverypathways, such as buccal, rectal, inhalation, intra-vaginal ortransdermal.The Company’s balance sheet at June 30, 2010, showed $3.11 millionin total assets, $76.51 million in total liabilities, and a$73.41 million stockholders’ deficit.Emisphere noted in an October 2010 filing with the Securities andExchange Commission that since its inception in 1986, it hasgenerated significant losses from operations.  Emisphereanticipates it will continue to generate significant losses fromoperations for the foreseeable future, and that its business willrequire substantial additional investment that it has not yetsecured.In its March 25, 2010 audit report on the Company’s financialstatements for the year ended December 31, 2009, McGladrey &Pullen, LLP, in New York, said there is substantial doubt aboutthe Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.  The auditreports prepared by the Company’s independent registered publicaccounting firms relating to its financial statements for theyears ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, also included anexplanatory paragraph expressing substantial doubt about theCompany’s ability to continue as a going concern.EMIVEST AEROSPACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors—————————————————————-Debtor: Emivest Aerospace Corporation          fka Sino Swearingen Aircraft        1770 Skyplace Boulevard        San Antonio, TX 78216Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-13391Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 20, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Delaware (Delaware)Debtor’s Counsel: Daniel B. Butz, Esq.                  MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP                  1201 N. Market Street, 18th Floor                  Wilmington, DE 19801                  Tel: (302) 575-7348                  Fax: (302) 658-3989                  E-mail: dbutz@mnat.comEstimated Assets: $50,000,001 to $100,000,000Estimated Debts: $50,000,001 to $100,000,000The petition was signed by Anthony Power, chief executive officer.Debtor’s List of 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————Yao-Hwa Glass Co Ltd.              Promissory Note     $15,000,0005th Floor, No. 10, Hengyang RoadTaipei, TaiwanFastenal Company                   Litigation           $1,577,7112001 Theurer BoulevardWinona, MN 55987Texas State Comptroller            Trade Debt – Sales     $999,8679514 Console Drive, Suite 102      TaxesSan Antonio, TX 78229European Avaiation Safety Agency   Trade Debt -           $928,961Postfach 10 12 53                  Certification ofCologne Germany 50452              SJ30-2 in EuropeBlue Cross Blue Shield of Texas    Trade Debt – Health    $365,000901 S. Central Expressway          Insurance, AdminRichardson, TX 75080               Fees and ClaimsDepartment of Treasury             Trade Debt -           $298,836Internal Revenue Service           Payroll TaxesOgden, UT 84201-0012Bexar County Tax Assessor -        Trade Debt             $282,053CollectorP.O. Box 839950San Antonio, TX 78283-3950Berkeley County Sheriff            Trade Debt -           $263,290400 W. Stephen Street              Personal and RealMartinsburg, WV 25401              Property TaxesSecurity Air Park, Inc.            Promissory Note        $250,000477 C-3A SandauSan Antonio, TX 78216Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd    Trade Debt -           $197,752                                   Production RelatedC&F Tool and Die Co.               Trade Debt -           $160,648                                   Production RelatedMetalcraft Technologies, Inc.      Trade Debt -           $109,483                                   Production RelatedTriumph Structures – Wichita, Inc. Trade Debt -           $104,516                                   Production RelatedAmetek Advanced Industries, Inc    Trade Debt -           $104,410                                   Production RelatedEllis & Winters, LLP               Trade Debt – Legal     $102,531                                   FeesTexas Workforce Commission         Trade Debt -            $92,728                                   Unemployment                                   Insurance TaxErnst & Young LLP                  Trade Debt – Tax        $90,057                                   Consulting FeesKPMG, LLP                          Trade Debt              $85,000                                   Auditing FeesDerse, Inc                         Trade Debt -            $84,495                                   Marketing RelatedSargent Controls & Aerospace       Trade Debt -            $79,740                                   Production RelatedEQK BRIDGEVIEW: Asks for Court’s OK to Use Cash Collateral———————————————————-EQK Bridgeview Plaza, Inc., seeks authority from the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas to use thecash collateral securing its obligations to prepetition lenders.As of the Petition Date, the Debtor was allegedly indebted to:(i) Grand Pacific Finance Corp. pursuant to a loan made to theDebtor by Grand Pacific on March 24, 2005, in the originalprincipal amount of $7,197,000; (ii) Bank of America, N.A., asindenture trustee under the Indenture, dated November 30, 2006,between Hometown Commercial Trust 2006-1 and LaSalle Bank NationalAssociation, acting through its servicer Midland Loan Services,Inc., pursuant to a loan originally made to TranscontinentalBrewery, Inc., by Hometown Commercial Capital, LLC, on October 13,2006, in the original principal amount of $2,450,000; (iii) BranchBanking & Trust Company pursuant to a loan originally made to EQKWindmill Farms, LLC, a Nevada Corporation, by Colonial Bank, N.A.,on November 17, 2006, in the original principal amount of$43,806,786; and (iv) Grand Pacific pursuant to a loan made toSouth Cochran Corporation by Grand Pacific on or about January 12,2005, in the original principal amount of $3,750,000.Melissa S. Hayward, Esq., at Franklin Skierski Lovall Hayward LLP,explains that the Debtor needs the money to fund its Chapter 11case, pay suppliers and other parties.  The Debtor will use thecollateral pursuant to a budget, a copy of which is available forfree at http://bankrupt.com/misc/EQK_budget.pdfAccording to the Debtor, each of the lenders’ respective interestsis adequately protected.  Each lender, says the Debtor, issignificantly oversecured, as the value of the real propertyserving as collateral for each respective Lender significantlyexceeds the amount of the indebtedness.In exchange for using the cash collateral, the Debtor will provideeach lender with a replacement lien on post-petition income toprotect each lender to the extent of any diminution in value ofits respective collateral.                    About EQK Bridgeview PlazaDallas, Texas-based EQK Bridgeview Plaza, Inc., owns various realestate holdings in multiple states.  Specifically, EQK Bridgeviewowns the Bridgeview Plaza shopping center in La Crosse, Wisconsin;an office building and warehouse and approximately 12.07 acres ofland behind the office building in Farmers Branch, Texas;approximately 2,928.441 acres of undeveloped land in KaufmanCounty, Texas; and the Dunes Plaza shopping center in MichiganCity, Indiana.EQK Bridgeview filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection onOctober 4, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Case No. 10-37054).  Melissa S.Hayward, Esq., at Franklin Skierski Lovall Hayward LLP, assistsEQK Bridgeview in its restructuring effort.  According to itsschedules, EQK Bridgeview disclosed $76,458,815 in total assetsand $74,763,048 in total liabilities.ESCOM LLC: Selling Sex.com Domain to Clover for $13 Million———————————————————–Melanie Cohen, writing for Dow Jones’ Daily Bankruptcy Review,reports that Escom LLC, owner of Sex.com, is seeking JudgeGeraldine Mund’s permission to sell the domain name to offshoreholding company Clover Holdings Ltd. for $13 million.According to DBR, Escom wants the Court to sign off on the sale nolater than October 27 because « it is imperative to the estate thatthis transaction close promptly. »  According to court documents,Clover’s bid was the « highest and best » offer and is « in the bestinterests of the debtor’s estate and all stakeholders. »According to DBR, court papers show that domain marketplace Sedobrokered the sale, undertaking « an extensive and elaboratecampaign » and conducting « lengthy discussion with many of theseparties regarding the assets. »  In all, Sedo entertained about adozen offers for Sex.com.Escom LLC was formed in 2006 to operate the Sex.com domain name,which was sold to it for $12 million by Match.com owner GaryKremen, according to the Washington Post.  Escom has been indefault of millions of dollars in loans since January 2009.Three creditors filed an involuntary Chapter 11 petition onMarch 17 against Escom LLC (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 10-13001),seeking payment of more than $10 million.  The petition haltedforeclosure by secured creditor DOM Partners LLC, owed $4.5million.  The companies that filed the involuntary petition arecontrolled by an individual named Michael Mann, who was Escom’smanager.According to Bloomberg, the bankruptcy court denied a motion byDOM to dismiss the petition as having been filed in bad faith.The judge also refused to allow DOM to continue foreclosure.Escom was officially ordered into bankruptcy on June 21, 2010.FANNIE MAE: Regulator Hires Quinn Emmanuel to Assist in Probe————————————————————-Nick Timiraos, writing for The Wall Street Journal, reports thatthe Federal Housing Finance Agency, as conservator for Fannie Maeand Freddie Mac, has hired Los Angeles-based Quinn EmanuelUrquhart & Sullivan LLP as the agency considers how to moveforward with efforts to recoup billions of dollars on souredmortgage-backed securities purchased from banks and Wall Streetfirms.As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on July 13, 2010, theFHFA issued 64 subpoenas to various entities, seeking documentsrelated to private-label mortgage-backed securities in which thetwo Enterprises invested.  The documents would enable the FHFA todetermine whether PLS issuers and others are liable to theEnterprises for certain losses they have suffered on PLS.  If so,the Conservator expects to recoup funds, which would be used tooffset payments made to the Enterprises by the U.S. Treasury.The FHFA didn’t disclose its targets.  The Journal’s Mr. Timiraosreported in July that the top private issuers of mortgagesecurities included Bear Stearns Cos. and Washington Mutual Inc.,which were taken over by J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., as well asCountrywide Home Loans and Merrill Lynch, which were taken over byBank of America Inc.  Deutsche Bank AG and Morgan Stanley werealso among the top issuers.  All the banks declined to comment.FHFA is now working with Quinn Emanuel to coordinate itsinvestigations.  According to the Journal, the FHFA said in astatement it is analyzing requested information and that « nodecisions for future action have been made. »  The Journal saysQuinn Emanuel confirmed its hiring by the FHFA but declined tocomment further.The Journal also reports that Bank of America Corp. on Tuesdayacknowledged receiving a letter from investors alleging that thebank didn’t properly service bond deals worth $47 billion.Investors include Freddie Mac and the Federal Reserve Bank of NewYork.  Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said thebank would « diligently fight this. »According to the Journal, analysts said the FHFA’s efforts couldultimately lead to a settlement that would avoid protracted legalbattles.   »There’s going to be much more incentive to negotiateseriously and quickly than if they had done this seven months ago,when people were blithely ignoring the fraud, » says William K.Black, a former federal bank regulator who is now an associateprofessor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law,the Journal relates.                         About Fannie MaeFederal National Mortgage Association, aka Fannie Mae, is agovernment-sponsored enterprise that was chartered by U.S.Congress in 1938 to support liquidity, stability and affordabilityin the secondary mortgage market, where existing mortgage-relatedassets are purchased and sold.Fannie Mae has been under conservatorship, with the FederalHousing Finance Agency acting as conservator, since September 6,2008.  As conservator, FHFA succeeded to all rights, titles,powers and privileges of the company, and of any shareholder,officer or director of the company with respect to the company andits assets.  The conservator has since delegated specifiedauthorities to Fannie Mae’s Board of Directors and has delegatedto management the authority to conduct day-to-day operations.The U.S. Department of the Treasury owns Fannie Mae’s seniorpreferred stock and a warrant to purchase 79.9% of its commonstock, and Treasury has made a commitment under a senior preferredstock purchase agreement to provide Fannie with funds underspecified conditions to maintain a positive net worth.FIDELITY PROPERTIES: Has Until October 29 to File Chapter 11 Plan—————————————————————–The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Floridaextended until October 29, 2010, Fidelity Properties Group, LLC’sexclusive period to file a proposed Chapter 11 Plan and DisclosureStatement.Orlando, Florida-based Fidelity Properties Group LLC filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 1, 2010 (Bankr. M.D.Fla. Case No. 10-05510).  Lawrence M. Kosto, Esq., Kosto & RotellaPA, assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.  The Companydisclosed $10,333,188 in assets and $3,593,828 in debts as of thePetition Date.FIRST NATIONAL BUILDING: Cases Transferred to W.D. Okla.——————————————————–The Honorable Geraldine Mund entered an order directing thetransfer of the Chapter 11 cases of First National Building I, LLCand First National Building II, LLC from the Central District ofCalifornia to the Western District of Oklahoma.  Capmark Bank andCapmark CDF Subfund VI LLC, the Debtor’s lenders, made therequest, and Judge Mund agreed to the venue change.  Capmark isrepresented by H. Mark Mersel, Esq. — mark.mersel@bryancave.com — at Bryan Cave LLP in Irvine, Calif.First National Building I, LLC, filed a chapter 11 petition(Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 10-22745) in Woodland Hills, Calif.,on Oct. 7, 2010, and the case was transferred (Bankr. W.D. Okla.Case No. 10-16334) to Oklahoma City on Oct. 13, 2010.  FirstNational Building II, LLC, filed a chapter 11 petition (Bankr.C.D. Calif. Case No. 10-22747) in Woodland Hills, Calif. on Oct.7, 2010, and the case was transferred (Bankr. W.D. Okla. Case No.10-16335) to Oklahoma City on Oct. 13, 2010.David L. Neale, Esq., and Juliet Y. Oh, Esq., at Levene, Neale,Bender, Yoo & Brill L.L.P. represent the Debtors.  The Debtorseach estimates assets and debts at $10 million to $50 million.The Debtors are affiliated with Roosevelt Lofts, LLC (Bankr. C.D.Calif. Case No. 09-14214).FORMTECH INDUSTRIES: PBGC Assumes Underfund Pension Plan——————————————————–The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation assumed responsibilityfor the underfunded pension plan covering 570 former workers andretirees of FormTech Industries, an automotive supplier based inRoyal Oak, Mich.The PBGC stepped in because FormTech is liquidating in bankruptcyproceedings, and there will be no sponsor left to fund oradminister the plan.  Retirees will continue to receive theirmonthly benefit payments without interruption, and other workerswill receive their pensions when they are eligible to retire.According to PBGC estimates, the FormTech Industries LLC PensionPlan is 38% funded, with assets of $2.23 million to cover $5.86million in benefit liabilities. The PBGC expects to be responsiblefor $2.05 million of the $3.63 million shortfall.The PBGC will take over the assets and use insurance funds to payguaranteed benefits earned under the plan.  The plan ended on Dec.31, 2009, and the agency assumed responsibility for the plan onSept. 10, 2010.Within the next several weeks, the PBGC will send notificationletters to all participants in the FormTech plan.  Underprovisions of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, the maximumguaranteed pension the PBGC can pay is determined by the legallimits in force on the date of the plan sponsor’s bankruptcy.Therefore participants in the plan are subject to the limits ineffect when FormTech filed for bankruptcy protection on Aug. 26,2009, which set a maximum guaranteed amount of $54,000 per yearfor a 65-year-old.The maximum guaranteed amount is lower for those who retireearlier or elect survivor benefits.  In addition, certain earlyretirement subsidies and benefit increases made within the fiveyears immediately before the Aug. 26, 2009 bankruptcy date may notbe fully guaranteed.Workers and retirees with questions may consult the PBGC Web site,http://www.pbgc.gov/or call toll-free at 1-800-400-7242.  For TTY/TDD users, call the federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask for 800-400-7242.FormTech retirees who draw a benefit from the PBGC may be eligiblefor the federal Health Coverage Tax Credit.  Further informationmay be found on the PBGC Web site at http://www.pbgc.gov/workers-retirees/benefits-information/content/page13692.htmlAssumption of the plan’s unfunded liabilities will increase thePBGC’s claims and was not previously included in the agency’sfiscal year 2009 financial statements.The PBGC is a federal corporation created under the EmployeeRetirement Income Security Act of 1974. It currently guaranteespayment of basic pension benefits earned by 44 million Americanworkers and retirees participating in over 29,000 private-sectordefined benefit pension plans. The agency receives no funds fromgeneral tax revenues. Operations are financed largely by insurancepremiums paid by companies that sponsor pension plans and byinvestment returns.FormTech was founded in 2006 and was a leading manufacturer ofgears and shafts for transmissions and transfer cases that wereused in almost every car and truck produced in the United States.The company operated plants in Michigan, Ohio and New York. In2009, FormTech defaulted on a credit agreement and many of thecompany’s suppliers demanded cash upon delivery, which pushed thecompany to the verge of bankruptcy.  After a controlling portionof FormTech’s credit agreement was purchased by HHI Funding LLC,the company filed for Chapter 11 protection in the U.S. BankruptcyCourt in Wilmington, Del., on Aug. 26, 2009.  Shortly thereafter,HHI purchased FormTech’s assets and declined to assumeresponsibility for the pension plan.The Company and its affiliate, FormTech Industries Holdings LLC,filed for Chapter 11 protection on Aug. 26, 2009 (Bankr. D. Del.Case Nos. 09-12964 and 09-12965).  Lynn M. Brimer, Esq., MeredithE. Taunt, Esq., and Andrew A. Ayar, Esq., at Strobl & Sharp, P.C.,represented the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.  TheDebtors selected Steven M. Yoder, Esq., Jeremy W. Ryan, Esq., and,R. Stephen McNeill, Esq., at Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, asco-counsel, and Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC, as claims agent.In its petition, FormTech Industries LLC estimated assets between$100 million and $500 million, and debts between $50 million and$100 million.FRANK ELIOPOULOS: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors—————————————————————Joint Debtors: Frank Nicholas Eliopoulos               Constantina Moschonas Eliopoulos               6812 N. Oracle, #138               Tucson, AZ 85704Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33494Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Arizona (Tucson)Judge: Eileen W. HollowellDebtors’ Counsel: Eric Slocum Sparks, Esq.                  ERIC SLOCUM SPARKS PC                  110 S. Church Avenue, #2270                  Tucson, AZ 85701                  Tel: (520) 623-8330                  Fax: (520) 623-9157                  E-mail: eric@ericslocumsparkspc.comScheduled Assets: $964,997Scheduled Debts: $2,581,767[REDACTED -- June 14, 2014]FRANKLIN PLACE: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: Franklin Place Senior Apartments, LP        340 Royal Poinciana Way, Ste. 305        Palm Beach, FL 33480Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-53300Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of Kentucky (Lexington)Debtor’s Counsel: Ellen Arvin Kennedy, Esq.                  DINSMORE & SHOHL                  250 West Main Street, Suite 1400                  Lexington, KY 40507                  Tel: (859) 425-1020                  E-mail: dsbankruptcy@dinslaw.comEstimated Assets: $500,001 to $1,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/kyeb10-53300.pdfThe petition was signed by Cristie George, senior vice presidentof sole member of the Debtor’s general partner.FREDDIE MAC: Director Rose Doesn’t Hold Securities Yet——————————————————Clayton S. Rose, who was recently elected to Freddie Mac’s boardof directors, disclosed in a Form 3 filing with the Securities andExchange Commission that he doesn’t hold any Freddie Macsecurities.As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on October 19, 2010,Freddie Mac said Mr. Rose, Professor of Management Practice atHarvard Business School and veteran executive in the financialservices and investment industries, was joining the Company’sboard.  Mr. Rose will serve on the Business and Risk andCompensation Committees of the Board.Freddie Mac said Mr. Rose will receive compensation as a non-executive director.  Freddie Mac will enter into anindemnification agreement with Mr. Rose, effective October 14,2010.                          About Freddie MacBased in McLean, Virginia, the Federal Home Loan MortgageCorporation, known as Freddie Mac (OTCBB: FMCC) –http://www.FreddieMac.com/– was established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to thenation’s residential mortgage markets.  Freddie Mac supportscommunities across the nation by providing mortgage capital tolenders.  Over the years, Freddie Mac has made home possible forone in six homebuyers and more than five million renters.Freddie Mac is under conservatorship and is dependent upon thecontinued support of Treasury and FHFA to continue operating itsbusiness.  The Company received $6.1 billion and $30.8 billion inJune 2009 and March 2009, respectively, pursuant to draw requeststhat FHFA submitted to Treasury on the Company’s behalf to addressthe deficits in the Company’s net worth as of March 31, 2009, andDecember 31, 2008, respectively.  As a result of funding of thedraw requests, the aggregate liquidation preference on the seniorpreferred stock owned by Treasury increased from $14.8 billion asof December 31, 2008, to $51.7 billion on December 31, 2009.FREDDIE MAC: Regulator Hires Quinn Emmanuel to Assist in Probe————————————————————–Nick Timiraos, writing for The Wall Street Journal, reports thatthe Federal Housing Finance Agency, as conservator for Fannie Maeand Freddie Mac, has hired Los Angeles-based Quinn EmanuelUrquhart & Sullivan LLP as the agency considers how to moveforward with efforts to recoup billions of dollars on souredmortgage-backed securities purchased from banks and Wall Streetfirms.As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on July 13, 2010, theFHFA issued 64 subpoenas to various entities, seeking documentsrelated to private-label mortgage-backed securities in which thetwo Enterprises invested.  The documents would enable the FHFA todetermine whether PLS issuers and others are liable to theEnterprises for certain losses they have suffered on PLS.  If so,the Conservator expects to recoup funds, which would be used tooffset payments made to the Enterprises by the U.S. Treasury.The FHFA didn’t disclose its targets.  The Journal’s Mr. Timiraosreported in July that the top private issuers of mortgagesecurities included Bear Stearns Cos. and Washington Mutual Inc.,which were taken over by J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., as well asCountrywide Home Loans and Merrill Lynch, which were taken over byBank of America Inc.  Deutsche Bank AG and Morgan Stanley werealso among the top issuers.  All the banks declined to comment.FHFA is now working with Quinn Emanuel to coordinate itsinvestigations.  According to the Journal, the FHFA said in astatement it is analyzing requested information and that « nodecisions for future action have been made. »  The Journal saysQuinn Emanuel confirmed its hiring by the FHFA but declined tocomment further.The Journal also reports that Bank of America Corp. on Tuesdayacknowledged receiving a letter from investors alleging that thebank didn’t properly service bond deals worth $47 billion.Investors include Freddie Mac and the Federal Reserve Bank of NewYork.  Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said thebank would « diligently fight this. »According to the Journal, analysts said the FHFA’s efforts couldultimately lead to a settlement that would avoid protracted legalbattles.   »There’s going to be much more incentive to negotiateseriously and quickly than if they had done this seven months ago,when people were blithely ignoring the fraud, » says William K.Black, a former federal bank regulator who is now an associateprofessor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law,the Journal relates.                          About Freddie MacBased in McLean, Virginia, the Federal Home Loan MortgageCorporation, known as Freddie Mac (OTCBB: FMCC) –http://www.FreddieMac.com/– was established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to thenation’s residential mortgage markets.  Freddie Mac supportscommunities across the nation by providing mortgage capital tolenders.  Over the years, Freddie Mac has made home possible forone in six homebuyers and more than five million renters.Freddie Mac is under conservatorship and is dependent upon thecontinued support of Treasury and FHFA to continue operating itsbusiness.  The Company received $6.1 billion and $30.8 billion inJune 2009 and March 2009, respectively, pursuant to draw requeststhat FHFA submitted to Treasury on the Company’s behalf to addressthe deficits in the Company’s net worth as of March 31, 2009, andDecember 31, 2008, respectively.  As a result of funding of thedraw requests, the aggregate liquidation preference on the seniorpreferred stock owned by Treasury increased from $14.8 billion asof December 31, 2008, to $51.7 billion on December 31, 2009.FREDDIE MAC: Sells 0.375% $5 Bil. 2-Yr. USD Reference Notes———————————————————–Freddie Mac priced its new 0.375% $5 billion two-year USDReference Notes(R) security due on November 30, 2012.  The issue,CUSIP number 3137EACP2, was priced at 99.772 to yield 0.484%, or12.5 basis points more than two-year U.S. Treasury Notes.  Theissue will settle on October 22, 2010.The new two-year Reference Notes security was offered via asyndicate of dealers headed by UBS Investment Bank, Goldman, Sachs& Co. and Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. An application was madeto list the issue on the Euro MTF market of the Luxembourg StockExchange.                          About Freddie MacBased in McLean, Virginia, the Federal Home Loan MortgageCorporation, known as Freddie Mac (OTCBB: FMCC) –http://www.FreddieMac.com/– was established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to thenation’s residential mortgage markets.  Freddie Mac supportscommunities across the nation by providing mortgage capital tolenders.  Over the years, Freddie Mac has made home possible forone in six homebuyers and more than five million renters.Freddie Mac is under conservatorship and is dependent upon thecontinued support of Treasury and FHFA to continue operating itsbusiness.  The Company received $6.1 billion and $30.8 billion inJune 2009 and March 2009, respectively, pursuant to draw requeststhat FHFA submitted to Treasury on the Company’s behalf to addressthe deficits in the Company’s net worth as of March 31, 2009, andDecember 31, 2008, respectively.  As a result of funding of thedraw requests, the aggregate liquidation preference on the seniorpreferred stock owned by Treasury increased from $14.8 billion asof December 31, 2008, to $51.7 billion on December 31, 2009.GENERAL GROWTH: Plan of Reorganization Confirmed by Court———————————————————General Growth Properties, Inc. disclosed that Judge Allan Gropperof the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkconfirmed the Company’s plan of reorganization.  GGP expects toemerge from Chapter 11 restructuring on or about the 8th ofNovember.GGP will emerge from its financial restructuring with a strongbalance sheet and substantially less debt, providing it with asolid financial foundation on which to execute its growthstrategy.  Upon emergence, GGP will have a significantly improvedcapital structure, having secured $6.8 billion in equitycommitments from Brookfield Asset Management, Fairholme Funds,Pershing Square Capital Management, Blackstone and The TeacherRetirement System of Texas.  GGP has also successfully andconsensually restructured approximately $15 billion in project-level debt, renegotiating terms and extending maturity dates. Inaddition, all pre-petition GGP creditors will be satisfied infull. »The confirmation of our plan is an important milestone as we laythe groundwork for a successful future for GGP.  We secured equitycommitments from four highly respected investment firms and one ofthe most admired pension funds in the U.S., restructured andextended our long-term debt and will pay every creditor in full, »said Adam Metz, chief executive officer of GGP.   »We are gratefulto all of our stakeholders for contributing to the success of thisprocess. We are now prepared to begin a new era for GGP on firmfinancial footing. »As part of its plan of reorganization, GGP will split itself intotwo separate publicly traded corporations upon emergence, andcurrent shareholders will receive common stock in both companies.The new GGP will remain the second-largest shopping mall owner andoperator in the country, with more than 185 regional malls in 43states, and will focus on largely stable, income-producingshopping malls and other real estate assets.  The spin-offcompany, The Howard Hughes Corporation, will consist of GGP’sportfolio of master planned communities and other strategic realestate development opportunities.Mr. Metz continued, « Over the last year and a half we have made anumber of operational enhancements and worked hard to prepare GGPfor a promising future and for the successful spin-off of TheHoward Hughes Corporation.  I know these have been challengingtimes and I would like to sincerely thank our employees,customers, suppliers, lenders and partners for all of theirsupport. »In its restructuring, GGP has successfully and consensuallyrestructured all of approximately $15 billion of the project-leveldebt included in the bankruptcy.  These plans provide for thepayment of all allowed creditor claims in full and the extensionof the secured mortgage loans so such debt has a range ofmaturities, with no restructured loan maturing before January 1,2014, and further provide for the repayment of restructuredsecured mortgage debt without any prepayment penalties.  Certaindebt associated with non-filed joint venture properties maturesprior to 2014.  In addition, $1.65 billion of pre-petition RouseBonds have elected to either exchange for new, longer dated Bondsor be reinstated at existing rates, thereby providing the companyan even more attractive maturity profile while allowing thecompany to forgo the more costly standby term debt facility it hadarranged.In addition, shareholders will receive a substantial recovery andGGP will implement a recapitalization with $6.8 billion of newcapital.  GGP’s investment agreements with Brookfield, Fairholme,Pershing Square, Blackstone and Teacher Retirement System of Texasprovide GGP with the flexibility to reduce their equityinvestments.  A key feature of these agreements is a clawbackprovision that provides GGP the option to replace up to $2.15billion of the capital being committed by Fairholme, PershingSquare and Teacher Retirement System of Texas with the proceeds ofequity issuances at more advantageous pricing. The new GGP hasfiled a registration statement on Form S-11 with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission to attempt to raise public equity shortlyafter emergence from Chapter 11.The offering of equity will be made only by means of a prospectus.A registration statement relating to these securities has beenfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission but has not yetbecome effective.  These securities may not be sold nor may offersto buy be accepted prior to the time the registration statementbecomes effective.                     About General GrowthBased in Chicago, Illinois, General Growth Properties, Inc. –http://www.ggp.com/– is the second-largest U.S. mall owner, having ownership interest in, or management responsibility for,more than 200 regional shopping malls in 44 states, as well asownership in master planned community developments and commercialoffice buildings.  The Company’s portfolio totals roughly200 million square feet of retail space and includes more than24,000 retail stores nationwide.  General Growth is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust.  TheCompany’s common stock is trading in the pink sheets under thesymbol GGWPQ.General Growth Properties Inc. and its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on April 16, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y., Case No.09-11977).  Marcia L. Goldstein, Esq., Gary T. Holtzer, Esq.,Adam P. Strochak, Esq., and Stephen A. Youngman, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges LLP, serve as bankruptcy counsel.  Kirkland &Ellis LLP is co-counsel.  Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC has beenengaged as claims agent.  The Company also hired AlixPartners LLPas financial advisor and Miller Buckfire Co. LLC, as investmentbankers.  The Debtors disclosed $29,557,330,000 in assets and$27,293,734,000 in debts as of December 31, 2008.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General GrowthBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Growth Properties Inc. and its variousaffiliates.  (http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GENERAL GROWTH: To Distribute Shares on November 1————————————————–General Growth Properties, Inc. disclosed November 1, 2010, is therecord date for the distribution of shares of the two separatepublicly traded corporations that will exist following GGP’semergence from bankruptcy.  Pursuant to GGP’s plan ofreorganization, each holder of a share of « old » GGP common stockas of the record date will receive 0.0983 of a share of commonstock of the spin-off company, The Howard Hughes Corporation.Following the distribution of the shares of The Howard HughesCorporation, existing shares of « old » GGP will be converted intoand represent the right to receive one « new » GGP share.  Nofractional shares of new GGP or The Howard Hughes Corporation willbe issued. The record date was determined in accordance with theconfirmation order entered by the bankruptcy court.  Thedistribution date will be the day GGP emerges from bankruptcy,which is expected to be on or around November 8, 2010.New GGP’s common stock has been approved for listing under thesymbol GGP, subject to official notice of issuance, on the NewYork Stock Exchange.  The Howard Hughes Corporation has filed anapplication to list its common stock on the NYSE under the symbolHHC.  GGP anticipates that NYSE « when issued » trading in thecommon stock of both companies will commence prior to thedistribution date.  An update on commencement of « when issued »trading will be provided when available.Given the nature of this transaction, holders of « old » GGP shareswho sell their shares leading up to and including on theemergence/distribution date will be giving up their entitlement toboth new GGP and The Howard Hughes Corporation shares.  Holdersare therefore encouraged to consult their financial advisorsbefore trading their existing shares of GGP.                          About General GrowthBased in Chicago, Illinois, General Growth Properties, Inc. –http://www.ggp.com/– is the second-largest U.S. mall owner, having ownership interest in, or management responsibility for,more than 200 regional shopping malls in 44 states, as well asownership in master planned community developments and commercialoffice buildings.  The Company’s portfolio totals roughly200 million square feet of retail space and includes more than24,000 retail stores nationwide.  General Growth is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust.  TheCompany’s common stock is trading in the pink sheets under thesymbol GGWPQ.General Growth Properties Inc. and its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on April 16, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y., Case No.09-11977).  Marcia L. Goldstein, Esq., Gary T. Holtzer, Esq.,Adam P. Strochak, Esq., and Stephen A. Youngman, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges LLP, serve as bankruptcy counsel.  Kirkland &Ellis LLP is co-counsel.  Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC has beenengaged as claims agent.  The Company also hired AlixPartners LLPas financial advisor and Miller Buckfire Co. LLC, as investmentbankers.  The Debtors disclosed $29,557,330,000 in assets and$27,293,734,000 in debts as of December 31, 2008.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General GrowthBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Growth Properties Inc. and its variousaffiliates.  (http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GENERAL MOTORS: Parties File Objections to Old GM Plan Outline————————————————————–Various parties, including two statutory committees, have filedobjections to the disclosure statement explaining Old GM’sproposed Chapter 11 plan.The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors complains to JudgeRobert Gerber of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York that despite repeated requests for MotorsLiquidation Company to publicly disclose additional informationand provide greater transparency to creditors, a significantamount of important information is notably absent from theDisclosure Statement explaining the Debtors’ Joint Chapter 11 Planof Reorganization,Counsel to the Creditors’ Committee, Thomas Moers Mayer, Esq., atKramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, in New York, points out theDisclosure Statement lacks adequate information in these keyaspects:  (1) The Disclosure Statement does not include the form of the      GUC Trust Agreement, which will govern the claims      reconciliation process and distributions and reporting to      creditors post-Effective Date.  (2) The Disclosure Statement does not disclose who will be      retained by the GUC Trust to administer the day-to-day      operations of the GUC Trust and on what terms.  (3) The Disclosure Statement does not include a budget for      wind-down expenses post-Effective Date.  In the course of      plan negotiations, the Creditors’ Committee began      negotiating a post-Effective Date budget with the Debtors      and U.S. Department of the Treasury to ensure that there      would be sufficient funding available to administer the      claims reconciliation and prosecute the Term Loan      Litigation.  (4) Less than two weeks before filing of the Plan and      Disclosure Statement, counsel to the Creditors’ Committee      learned that, per the Treasury’s request, the Plan would      leave open whether Treasury or unsecured creditors are      the proper beneficiaries of an action initiated by the      Creditors’ Committee to recover $1.5 billion paid to the      Prepetition Term Lenders.  (5) The Disclosure Statement does not provide detail on the      size of the claims pool, which is critical for creditors      to understand the amount of their distribution and the      required reserves.Wilmington Trust Company, a member of the Creditors’ Committee,separately raised concerns on the Disclosure Statement withrespect to the budget and certain deficiencies regarding the TermLoan Litigation.  On behalf of WTC, Matthew J. Williams, Esq., atGibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, in New York, reminds the Court thatWTC has sought to ensure that the Debtors’ estates’ budgeted cashposition was sufficient to fund an orderly wind-down, claimsreconciliation and distribution process.  WTC’s concern wasresolved pursuant to an agreement with the Treasury, the Debtorsand the Creditors’ Committee, whereby the Treasury agreed to(i) increase the funds available for the wind-down to$1.175 billion; and (ii) provide for a Wind-Down Facility thatwould mature only after the claims reconciliation and liquidationof the Debtors’ estates.  If approved in its current form, theDisclosure Statement would eviscerate this deal insofar as thePlan proposes to prepay the Wind-Down Facility on the EffectiveDate, Mr. Williams contends.The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors Holding Asbestos-Related Claims, on the other hand, complains to Judge Gerber thatthe Debtors have filed a Disclosure Statement that omits criticalinformation that asbestos creditors will need before decidingwhether to vote for or against a plan of reorganization.Specifically, the Asbestos Committee asserts that the DisclosureStatement for the Debtors’ Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganizationcompletely fails to give asbestos creditors any basis on which toevaluate their potential recoveries.In conjunction with the Asbestos Committee’s assertions on thepurported releases to New GM, Dean M. Trafelet, as LegalRepresentative for Future Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants,seeks elaboration on these issues:  (1) The Plan purports to release nondebtor third parties,      including New GM, from all asbestos liability and to      enjoin creditors from filing suit on account of such      asbestos liability.  (2) By providing that the « sole recourse » of all holders of      Asbestos Personal Injury Claims — including future      asbestos claimants — is the Asbestos Trust, the Plan      arguably precludes those holders from pursuing unrelated      third parties for their own, independent involvement with      asbestos.  (3) The definition of « Protected Party » in the Plan includes      New GM, thus releasing New GM from all asbestos liability      and precluding creditors from suing New GM despite the      fact that New GM is paying no consideration for its      release and the injunction.                           U.S. TrusteeTracy Hope Davis, the U.S. Trustee for Region 2, opposes approvalof the Disclosure Statement to the Joint Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization because it does not provide adequate information:   (i) concerning the postpetition appointment of Brady C.       Williamson, as Fee Examiner;  (ii) on the professional fees incurred by the Debtors after the       Petition Date through the effective date of the Plan; (iii) regarding the cash needs of the Debtors for the Plan to be       effectuated;  (iv) as to the treatment of quarterly fees due to the U.S.       Trustee or post-confirmation reporting of disbursements;   (v) or comport with Second Circuit law, concerning the       releases and exculpation; and  (vi) on the effect of confirmation with regard to the absence       of discharge                    GM Nova Scotia Noteholders »The Disclosure Statement contains confusing and ambiguouslanguage with regard to the allowance and treatment of the Wind-up Claim and the Guarantee Claims, which makes it impossible forthe objecting parties to make an informed decision regarding thetreatment of the claims under the Plan, » certain holders of notesissued by General Motors Nova Scotia Finance Company allege.Specifically, on behalf of the noteholders John H. Bae, Esq., atGreenberg Traurig, LLP, in New York — baej@gtlaw.com — complainsto the Court that the Disclosure Statement is not clear as towhether a $1.6 billion Wind-up Claim and $1.7 billion GuaranteeClaims are allowed as required by a Lock-Up Agreement.  He furthernotes that the Disclosure Statement does not say whether MotorsLiquidation Company is acting in manner consistent with itsobligations under the Lock-up Agreement.  The Lock-up Agreementhowever clearly obligates MLC to allow both the Wind-up and theGuarantee Claims, he insists.Green Hunt Wedlake, Inc., as trustee for GM Nova Scotia, stressesthat it is crucial that the Disclosure Statement elaborate on theallowance of the Wind-up Claim and the potential consequences ofMotors Liquidation Company’s failure to abide by its obligationsunder the Lock Up Agreement.The Nova Scotia Trustee reminds the Court that the Debtors’compliance with the Lock Up Agreement was material to theresolution of the Noteholders’ prepetition litigation againstMotors Liquidation, GM Canada and GM Nova Scotia.   »The Debtors’failure to continue to comply with the entirety of the Lock UpAgreement not only materially and negatively impacts the NovaScotia Trustee, but also may give rise to additional causes ofaction against Motors Liquidation, GM Canada and New GM that couldadversely impact creditor recoveries, » Phillip C. Dublin, Esq., atAkin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP — pdublin@akingump.com –counsel to the Nova Scotia Trustee asserts.                         Other ClaimantsThe County of Onondaga and the Town of Salina, both of the Stateof New York; the California Department of Toxic SubstancesControl; the Ilco Remediation Group; and BKK Joint Defense Groupraised concerns regarding treatment of their claims set forth inthe Disclosure Statement for the Joint Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization.Winkelmann Sp. z.o.o. asserts, in two separate filings with theCourt, that the Debtors should amend the Joint Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization and the Disclosure Statement to clarify thatholders of Class 3 general unsecured claims retain their right tosetoff in connection with resolution of timely filed claims.Counsel to Winkelmann, Steven B. Eichel, Esq., at Crowell &Moring LLP, in New York — seichel@crowell.com — argues thatwithout providing for the right of setoff, the Debtors couldreceive a windfall at the expense of its general unsecuredcreditors as a result of the delay in resolving claims prior toconfirmation.                   Debtors Address DS ObjectionsThe Debtors assert that of the about 55 objections to the approvalof the Disclosure Statement, only 13 relate to the adequacy of theDisclosure Statement.  The remaining Objections are, in fact,objections to confirmation of the Plan or general statements ofdissatisfaction with the sale of substantially all of the Debtors’assets to General Motors, LLC or the general effects of Chapter 11on creditors and equity holders.A summary of the Debtors’ response or proposed resolution to theObjections is available for free at:        http://bankrupt.com/misc/gm_dsobjectionssummary.pdfHarvey R. Miller, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, in NewYork, tells the Court that the Debtors intend to modify theDisclosure Statement and the Plan in an attempt to resolve certainof the concerns articulated in the Objections, which relate to theadequacy of the Disclosure Statement.  Mr. Miller says the Debtorswill file an amended Disclosure Statement and Plan as soon aspracticable.  The Debtors’ Amended Plan and Disclosure Statementwill, among other things, provide an estimate or estimated rangefor the Allowed Claims in each Class, he says.  The Amended Planwill also annex as exhibits the GUC Trust Agreement and theEnvironmental Response Trust Consent Decree and SettlementAgreement, he adds.In addition, Mr. Miller says, contrary to the assertions made bythe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors Holding Asbestos-Related Claims and the Future Claimants’ Representative, the Planis neither « patently » nor « facially » unconfirmable.  To thecontrary, the Plan represents the only viable conduit for exitfrom these Chapter 11 cases and provides for a simple pro ratadistribution of all remaining assets to holders of allowedunsecured claims, he insists.  At best, there are litigableissues relating to confirmation, which, if at all, should beraised and addressed at that time, he tells the Court.With the proposed revisions, the Amended Disclosure Statement willcontain all necessary information to satisfy the requirements ofSection 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code, and that the Plan isconfirmable, fair and reasonable, and in the best interests of allparties-in-interest, the Debtors maintain.                       The Chapter 11 PlanMotors Liquidation Company, formerly General Motors Corporation;MLC of Harlem, Inc.; MLCS, LLC; MLCS Distribution Corporation;Remediation and Liability Management Company, Inc.; andEnvironmental Corporate Remediation Company, Inc., delivered onAugust 31 to Judge Robert Gerber of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York their Joint Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization and a Disclosure Statement explaining the Plan.The Plan, provides a framework for the environmental remediationof the remaining « Old GM » properties and the distribution of « NewGM » stock and warrants to unsecured creditors.If the Plan is confirmed, substantially all of the Debtors’ assetsand liabilities will be transferred to four trusts:   (1) the Environmental Remediation Trust, or « ERT, » that       provides funds for the continuing environmental       remediation of the Debtors’ remaining properties;   (2) the General Unsecured Creditors Trust, that will be       responsible for resolving the outstanding claims of the       Debtors’ unsecured creditors and distributing the General       Motors Company common stock and warrants owned by MLC to       those unsecured creditors whose claims are allowed;   (3) the Asbestos Trust that will handle both present and       future asbestos-related claims against the Debtors; and   (4) the Avoidance Action Trust that will deal with certain       litigation-related claims of the Debtors.MLC presently owns 10% of General Motors’ common stock, pluswarrants that are exercisable for a further 15% of General Motors’common stock on a fully diluted basis.  MLC will be issued up toan additional 2% of General Motors’ common stock if the finalestimated aggregate amount of the Debtors’ unsecured claimsexceeds certain thresholds.Additional key highlights of the Debtors’ chapter 11 case to dateinclude:   – Management of more than 70,000 claims, totaling more than      $275 billion, with more than $150 billion in claims already      eliminated or resolved.   – Management of more than 900,000 contracts covering more      than 65,000 business partners.   – Announced asset-sales activities that include the sale of      the Debtors’ Wilmington (Del.) Assembly to Fisker      Automotive Inc. (for the production of hybrid electric      cars); the sale of Pontiac (Mich.) Centerpoint to Raleigh      Studios Inc. (for the creation of a movie studio); and an      agreement, subject to certain conditions, to sell      Strasbourg (France) Powertrain to General Motors (which is      expected to save 1,200 jobs).   – The establishment of a Web portal to facilitate      communication with interested parties, which has had almost      32 million hits to date.                        About General MotorsWith its global headquarters in Detroit, Michigan, General MotorsCompany — http://www.gm.com/– is one of the world’s largest automakers.  GM employs 205,000 people in every major region ofthe world and does business in some 157 countries.  GM and itsstrategic partners produce cars and trucks in 31 countries, andsell and service these vehicles through the following brands:Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, FAW, GMC, Daewoo, Holden, Jiefang,Opel, Vauxhall and Wuling.  GM’s largest national market is China,followed by the United States, Brazil, Germany, the UnitedKingdom, Canada, and Italy.  GM’s OnStar subsidiary is theindustry leader in vehicle safety, security and informationservices.General Motors Co. is 60.8% owned by the U.S. Government.  It wasformed to acquire the operations of General Motors Corporationthrough a sale under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 363 following Old GM’sbankruptcy filing.  The deal was closed on July 10, 2009, and OldGM changed its name to Motors Liquidation Co.  Old GM remainssubject to a pending Chapter 11 reorganization case before theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.At June 30, 2010, GM had $131.899 billion in total assets,$101.00 billion in total liabilities, $6.998 billion in preferredstock, and $23.901 billion in stockholders’ equity.New GM has a ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating from Standard & Poor’sand a ‘BB-’ issuer default rating from Fitch.                     About Motors LiquidationGeneral Motors Corporation and three of its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on June 1, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 09-50026).  The Honorable Robert E. Gerber presides over theChapter 11 cases.  Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Stephen Karotkin, Esq.,and Joseph H. Smolinsky, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP,assist the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.  Al Koch at APServices, LLC, an affiliate of AlixPartners, LLP, serves as theChief Executive Officer for Motors Liquidation Company.  GM isalso represented by Jenner & Block LLP and Honigman MillerSchwartz and Cohn LLP as counsel.  Cravath, Swaine, & Moore LLP isproviding legal advice to the GM Board of Directors.  GM’sfinancial advisors are Morgan Stanley, Evercore Partners and theBlackstone Group LLP.The U.S. Trustee has appointed an Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors and a separate Official Committee of Unsecured CreditorsHolding Asbestos-Related Claims.  Lawyers at Kramer Levin Naftalis& Frankel LLP serve as bankruptcy counsel to the CreditorsCommittee.  Attorneys at Butzel Long serve as counsel regardingsupplier contract matters.  FTI Consulting, Inc., serves asfinancial advisors to the Creditors Committee.  Elihu Inselbuch,Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, represents the AsbestosCommittee.  Legal Analysis Systems, Inc., serves as asbestosvaluation analyst.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General MotorsBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Motors Corp. and its various affiliates.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GENERAL MOTORS: To Add Chicago as Mediation Location—————————————————-Motors Liquidation Co. and its units ask the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtto amend the order approving the alternative dispute resolutionprocedures to add Chicago, Illinois, as a mediation location andamend the schedule of mediators.Joseph H. Smolinsky, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, in NewYork, relates that several holders of Designated Claims haverequested to mediate in Chicago instead of the other MediationLocations.  Adding Chicago, Illinois as a Mediation Location willhelp minimize costs for the Designated Claimants and ensure theeffectiveness of the ADR Procedures, he asserts.Mr. Smolinsky adds that the Debtors seek to modify the Scheduleof Mediators because one mediator listed on the original Scheduleof Mediators has developed a conflict.  The Debtors also seek toreplace certain mediators who charge travel costs to mediate inSan Francisco, California, with mediators who do not charge suchcosts.  As required by the ADR Order, the Debtors have consultedwith the Ad Hoc Committee regarding these changes to the Scheduleof Mediators and provided counsel to the Ad Hoc Committee with arevised Sharing Cap schedule that includes the Sharing Cap foreach additional mediator proposed to be added to the Schedule ofMediators.Mr. Smolinsky maintains that the Debtors’ goal in establishingthe ADR Procedures was to conduct an efficient mediation processfor them without unjustifiably inconveniencing the affectedclaimant.  The Debtors believe, in the exercise of their businessjudgment, that the requested modifications will further theirgoal.                        About General MotorsWith its global headquarters in Detroit, Michigan, General MotorsCompany — http://www.gm.com/– is one of the world’s largest automakers.  GM employs 205,000 people in every major region ofthe world and does business in some 157 countries.  GM and itsstrategic partners produce cars and trucks in 31 countries, andsell and service these vehicles through the following brands:Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, FAW, GMC, Daewoo, Holden, Jiefang,Opel, Vauxhall and Wuling.  GM’s largest national market is China,followed by the United States, Brazil, Germany, the UnitedKingdom, Canada, and Italy.  GM’s OnStar subsidiary is theindustry leader in vehicle safety, security and informationservices.General Motors Co. is 60.8% owned by the U.S. Government.  It wasformed to acquire the operations of General Motors Corporationthrough a sale under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 363 following Old GM’sbankruptcy filing.  The deal was closed on July 10, 2009, and OldGM changed its name to Motors Liquidation Co.  Old GM remainssubject to a pending Chapter 11 reorganization case before theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.At June 30, 2010, GM had $131.899 billion in total assets,$101.00 billion in total liabilities, $6.998 billion in preferredstock, and $23.901 billion in stockholders’ equity.New GM has a ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating from Standard & Poor’sand a ‘BB-’ issuer default rating from Fitch.                     About Motors LiquidationGeneral Motors Corporation and three of its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on June 1, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 09-50026).  The Honorable Robert E. Gerber presides over theChapter 11 cases.  Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Stephen Karotkin, Esq.,and Joseph H. Smolinsky, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP,assist the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.  Al Koch at APServices, LLC, an affiliate of AlixPartners, LLP, serves as theChief Executive Officer for Motors Liquidation Company.  GM isalso represented by Jenner & Block LLP and Honigman MillerSchwartz and Cohn LLP as counsel.  Cravath, Swaine, & Moore LLP isproviding legal advice to the GM Board of Directors.  GM’sfinancial advisors are Morgan Stanley, Evercore Partners and theBlackstone Group LLP.The U.S. Trustee has appointed an Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors and a separate Official Committee of Unsecured CreditorsHolding Asbestos-Related Claims.  Lawyers at Kramer Levin Naftalis& Frankel LLP serve as bankruptcy counsel to the CreditorsCommittee.  Attorneys at Butzel Long serve as counsel regardingsupplier contract matters.  FTI Consulting, Inc., serves asfinancial advisors to the Creditors Committee.  Elihu Inselbuch,Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, represents the AsbestosCommittee.  Legal Analysis Systems, Inc., serves as asbestosvaluation analyst.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General MotorsBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Motors Corp. and its various affiliates.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GENERAL MOTORS: US TREASURY Wants Unsecureds Plea on « Deal » Denied——————————————————————The official committee of unsecured creditors formed in theChapter 11 cases of Motors Liquidation, formerly General MotorsCorp., filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York a motion to enforce the bankruptcy judge’sprevious order approving a DIP financing and the wind-down processfor Old GM.The Creditors Committee explains that on August 26, 2010 — morethan a year after the Committee sued for the return of$1.5 billion paid on account of an apparently voidable securityinterest (« Term Loan Litigation ») — the U.S. Treasury for thefirst time asserted that Treasury, not the unsecured creditors,owned the Term Loan Litigation.  On August 31, 2010, the Debtorsfiled a Joint Chapter 11 Plan, which, at the Treasury’s request,provided that ownership of the Term Loan Litigation would bedetermined by the Court or by negotiation between Treasury and theCommittee.                    Treasury Dept. Denies « Deal »The U.S. Department of the Treasury asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtto deny the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors’ motionbecause it is jurisdictionally and procedurally improper, seeksrelief that is contrary to the Bankruptcy Code, and rests on theasserted existence of a « deal » that is not reflected in governingdocuments.On behalf of the Treasury, David S. Jones, Esq., assistant U.S.attorney, in New York — David.jones@usdoj.gov — asserts thatthe Creditors’ Committee fails to recognize that the very ordersthat it invokes grant the Treasury, as DIP lender, an allowedsuper-priority administrative expense claim under the DIP CreditFacility.  Nonetheless, the Creditors’ Committee asks the Courtto decide, based on other provisions of orders and agreementsthat nowhere expunge or waive the Treasury’s administrativeclaim, that only the Debtors’ unsecured creditors are entitled tobenefit from future potential proceeds of an action to avoid$1.5 billion in liens and transfers, he points out.Mr. Jones further asserts that the Creditors’ Committee seeks toenforce orders that the Treasury neither has violated nor is inimminent danger of violating and, thus presents no ripe case orcontroversy.  All the Treasury has done is: (a) file a shortpleading in the Term Loan Litigation noting that any recoveryshould be for the benefit of the Debtors’ estates; and (b) askthat the Debtors modify their Plan to leave open the ultimateallocation of any proceeds of the Term Loan Litigation, hestresses.  He also contends that it is unclear at this timewhether or to what extent the Term Loan Litigation will succeed.Thus, the question the Motion to Enforce asks the Court toresolve is purely hypothetical and may never need to be decided,he points out.   »The Motion to Enforce is superfluous to — andan improper attempt to circumvent — the disclosure statement andplan confirmation process, » the Treasury alleges.More importantly, Mr. Jones clarifies that the governingdocuments do not reflect the « deal » that the Creditors’ Committeeasserts the parties struck.  It is true that the Treasury agreedto except any avoidance action proceeds from its DIP wind-downloan « collateral, » and it is true that that facility is on a »non-recourse basis, » he affirms.  But it is also true that thevery same negotiated orders and agreements granted the Treasury »an allowed super-priority administrative expense claim » in thefull amount outstanding on the DIP wind-down loan, he says. »No order or agreement has deprived the Treasury of a claim ofthat kind, nor has any order authorized a plan that, contrary tostatute, fails to pay the Treasury’s allowed administrativeclaim, » Mr. Jones insists.  The Creditors’ Committee’s requestfails to acknowledge those vital aspects of the governing ordersand agreements nor does it present any extrinsic evidence thatthe Treasury agreed or intended that the governing orders wouldhave the meaning the Committee asserts.                  Creditors’ Committee Talks BackThe Creditors’ Committee argues that the Treasury’s objectionestablishes that the Bankruptcy Court can, and should, act now toresolve once and for all which entity is entitled to the proceedsof the Term Loan Litigation.Thomas Moers Mayer, Esq., at Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP,in New York, points out that the Treasury does not dispute thatit negotiated the Final DIP Order with the Debtors and theCommittee nor does the Treasury contest that it has no lien overthe Term Loan Litigation or that the Wind-Down Facility is non-recourse to those proceeds.  Mr. Mayer also points out that theTreasury does not dispute that it has sat silently by while theCommittee prosecuted the Term Loan Litigation with the clearunderstanding that the proceeds of that case would inure to thebenefit of creditors other than Treasury.Mr. Mayer notes that the Court has a hearing on summary judgmenton the Term Loan Litigation on November 1, by which time theCommittee needs to know whether it is litigating for creditors,in which case the Committee will proceed, or for Treasury, inwhich case the Committee will seek to drop the lawsuit.With regard to the merits of the Motion, Mr. Mayer complains thatthe Treasury’s Objection fails to provide a basis for having theCourt re-write the deal that was negotiated between the partiesabout who would get the benefit of the Term Loan Litigation.  TheTreasury’s sole argument, he points out, is that it has apriority claim and it must be paid at confirmation.  Thisargument ignores the plain language of Section 1129(a)(9) of theBankruptcy Code, which provides that a priority claim must bepaid « except to the extent that a holder of a particular claimhas agreed to a different treatment of such claim. »The Creditors’ Committee maintains that the Court should enforcethat agreement.Dean M. Trafelet, the Future Claimants’ Representative, and theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors Holding Asbestos-related Claims join in the Creditors’ Committee’s request.                        About General MotorsWith its global headquarters in Detroit, Michigan, General MotorsCompany — http://www.gm.com/– is one of the world’s largest automakers.  GM employs 205,000 people in every major region ofthe world and does business in some 157 countries.  GM and itsstrategic partners produce cars and trucks in 31 countries, andsell and service these vehicles through the following brands:Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, FAW, GMC, Daewoo, Holden, Jiefang,Opel, Vauxhall and Wuling.  GM’s largest national market is China,followed by the United States, Brazil, Germany, the UnitedKingdom, Canada, and Italy.  GM’s OnStar subsidiary is theindustry leader in vehicle safety, security and informationservices.General Motors Co. is 60.8% owned by the U.S. Government.  It wasformed to acquire the operations of General Motors Corporationthrough a sale under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 363 following Old GM’sbankruptcy filing.  The deal was closed on July 10, 2009, and OldGM changed its name to Motors Liquidation Co.  Old GM remainssubject to a pending Chapter 11 reorganization case before theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.At June 30, 2010, GM had $131.899 billion in total assets,$101.00 billion in total liabilities, $6.998 billion in preferredstock, and $23.901 billion in stockholders’ equity.New GM has a ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating from Standard & Poor’sand a ‘BB-’ issuer default rating from Fitch.                     About Motors LiquidationGeneral Motors Corporation and three of its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on June 1, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 09-50026).  The Honorable Robert E. Gerber presides over theChapter 11 cases.  Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Stephen Karotkin, Esq.,and Joseph H. Smolinsky, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP,assist the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.  Al Koch at APServices, LLC, an affiliate of AlixPartners, LLP, serves as theChief Executive Officer for Motors Liquidation Company.  GM isalso represented by Jenner & Block LLP and Honigman MillerSchwartz and Cohn LLP as counsel.  Cravath, Swaine, & Moore LLP isproviding legal advice to the GM Board of Directors.  GM’sfinancial advisors are Morgan Stanley, Evercore Partners and theBlackstone Group LLP.The U.S. Trustee has appointed an Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors and a separate Official Committee of Unsecured CreditorsHolding Asbestos-Related Claims.  Lawyers at Kramer Levin Naftalis& Frankel LLP serve as bankruptcy counsel to the CreditorsCommittee.  Attorneys at Butzel Long serve as counsel regardingsupplier contract matters.  FTI Consulting, Inc., serves asfinancial advisors to the Creditors Committee.  Elihu Inselbuch,Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, represents the AsbestosCommittee.  Legal Analysis Systems, Inc., serves as asbestosvaluation analyst.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General MotorsBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Motors Corp. and its various affiliates.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GENERAL MOTORS: Wants to Enforce Wind-Down Order on Rose, et al.—————————————————————-General Motors LLC, or New GM, asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York to enforce the Wind-DownAgreements against Rose Chevrolet, Inc., Halleen Chevrolet, Inc.,and Andy Chevrolet Company d/b/a Sims Chevrolet, Inc.,collectively known as the « Ohio Dealers; » and Leson ChevroletCompany, Inc.The Ohio Dealers have filed in the United States District Courtfor the Northern District of Ohio, and Leson has filed with theLouisiana Motor Vehicle Commission separate actions in which theyassert that they are not required to comply with theirobligations under their respective Wind-Down Agreements toterminate their Chevrolet Dealer Agreements by October 31, 2010,and to bring any disputes relating to the Wind-Down Agreements inthe Bankruptcy Court.The Actions, Arthur Steinberg, Esq., at King & Spalding LLP, in NNew York, asserts, are a direct violation of the BankruptcyCourt’s July 5, 2009 363 Sale Order.Because the Dealers are refusing to abide by the 363 Sale Orderand their respective Court-approved Wind-Down Agreements, New GMasks for an order:  (a) enforcing the 363 Sale Order and the terms of the Wind      Down Agreements, including, but not limited to, sections      2(a) (termination of the Chevrolet Dealer Agreements by      October 31, 2010), 5(d) (covenant not to sue New GM), and      13 (exclusive jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court), and      directing Rose, Halleen, Sims and Leson to specifically      perform their respective obligations pursuant to, inter      alia, sections 5(d) and 17 thereof;  (b) directing Rose, Halleen, Sims, Leson and all persons      acting in concert with them to cease and desist from      further prosecuting, or otherwise pursuing the claims      asserted in, the Actions against New GM;  (c) directing Rose, Halleen, Sims and Leson to dismiss the      Actions; and  (d) granting other and further relief as may be warranted by,      among other things, the Dealers’ breach of section 5(e) of      the Wind-Down Agreements (the indemnification provision)      and the Dealers’ violations of the Bankruptcy Court’s      orders.                     Leson Chevrolet ReactsThe 363 Sale Order and Old GM’s Wind-Down Agreements do notgovern Leson’s relationship with New GM, counsel to Leson,Jeffrey A. Cooper, Esq., at Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein,Brody & Agnello, P.C., in Roseland, New Jersey –JCooper@CarellaByrne.com — argues.Leson won reinstatement to the Chevrolet dealer network throughCongressionally-mandated arbitration, Mr. Cooper asserts.  UnlikeRose, Halleen, Andy or Rally, Leson seeks enforcement — notjudicial review — of its arbitration order, he clarifies.Specifically, Leson challenges the wind-down agreement’sapplicability under Louisiana law and Section 747 of theConsolidated Appropriations Act now that Leson won itsarbitration, Mr. Cooper says.  Thus, the Bankruptcy Court doesnot maintain exclusive jurisdiction over Leson’s claim forenforcement of its reinstatement order, Mr. Cooper insists.Leson’s claim does not impact the 363 Sale Order or DeferredTermination Agreements, he maintains.In order to properly consider Leson’s factual and legalquestions, Leson seeks its own hearing so that the BankruptcyCourt may fully consider Leson’s jurisdictional and substantivearguments separate from the unsuccessful dealerships’ claims.          New GM Submits Proposed Order for Rally MatterNew GM submitted with the Court a revised proposed orderreflecting agreed upon revisions with Rally Auto Group Inc.  Therevised proposed order adds the language stating that nothing inthe Order will preclude Rally from seeking stay relief withrespect to the Order in the United States District Court for theSouthern District of New York or any appellate court of theDistrict Court.                        About General MotorsWith its global headquarters in Detroit, Michigan, General MotorsCompany — http://www.gm.com/– is one of the world’s largest automakers.  GM employs 205,000 people in every major region ofthe world and does business in some 157 countries.  GM and itsstrategic partners produce cars and trucks in 31 countries, andsell and service these vehicles through the following brands:Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, FAW, GMC, Daewoo, Holden, Jiefang,Opel, Vauxhall and Wuling.  GM’s largest national market is China,followed by the United States, Brazil, Germany, the UnitedKingdom, Canada, and Italy.  GM’s OnStar subsidiary is theindustry leader in vehicle safety, security and informationservices.General Motors Co. is 60.8% owned by the U.S. Government.  It wasformed to acquire the operations of General Motors Corporationthrough a sale under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 363 following Old GM’sbankruptcy filing.  The deal was closed on July 10, 2009, and OldGM changed its name to Motors Liquidation Co.  Old GM remainssubject to a pending Chapter 11 reorganization case before theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.At June 30, 2010, GM had $131.899 billion in total assets,$101.00 billion in total liabilities, $6.998 billion in preferredstock, and $23.901 billion in stockholders’ equity.New GM has a ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating from Standard & Poor’sand a ‘BB-’ issuer default rating from Fitch.                     About Motors LiquidationGeneral Motors Corporation and three of its affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on June 1, 2009 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 09-50026).  The Honorable Robert E. Gerber presides over theChapter 11 cases.  Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Stephen Karotkin, Esq.,and Joseph H. Smolinsky, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP,assist the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.  Al Koch at APServices, LLC, an affiliate of AlixPartners, LLP, serves as theChief Executive Officer for Motors Liquidation Company.  GM isalso represented by Jenner & Block LLP and Honigman MillerSchwartz and Cohn LLP as counsel.  Cravath, Swaine, & Moore LLP isproviding legal advice to the GM Board of Directors.  GM’sfinancial advisors are Morgan Stanley, Evercore Partners and theBlackstone Group LLP.The U.S. Trustee has appointed an Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors and a separate Official Committee of Unsecured CreditorsHolding Asbestos-Related Claims.  Lawyers at Kramer Levin Naftalis& Frankel LLP serve as bankruptcy counsel to the CreditorsCommittee.  Attorneys at Butzel Long serve as counsel regardingsupplier contract matters.  FTI Consulting, Inc., serves asfinancial advisors to the Creditors Committee.  Elihu Inselbuch,Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, represents the AsbestosCommittee.  Legal Analysis Systems, Inc., serves as asbestosvaluation analyst.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes General MotorsBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by General Motors Corp. and its various affiliates.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) GOLF PROPERTY: Case Summary & 5 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————–Debtor: Golf Property Investments, LLC        7407 N. 116th Avenue Circle        Omaha, NE 68142Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-83008Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Nebraska (Omaha Office)Debtor’s Counsel: Kathryn J. Derr, Esq.                  KATHRYN J. DERR, PC, LLO                  11205 Wright Circle, Suite 210                  Omaha, NE 68144                  Tel: (402) 933-0070                  Fax: (402) 933-0707                  E-mail: kjd@kjderrlaw.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s five largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/neb10-83008.pdfThe petition was signed by Dannie Livingston, manager/sole member.GTC BIOTHERAPEUTICS: LFB Bids to Take GTC Private at $0.28 Apiece—————————————————————–GTC Biotherapeutics Inc. said it received a letter from LFBBiotechnologies SAS, Les Ulis, France, addressed to theindependent members of the Company’s Board of Directors indicatingthat LFB’s Board of Directors had approved LFB making an offer totake GTC private for $.28 per share.  The opening and closingprices of GTC Common Stock on Oct. 15, 2010 on the over thecounter markets were $.28 and $.34 per share, respectively.The going private transaction, as proposed by LFB, would bestructured as follows: LFB would purchase approximately 61 millionshares of GTC Common Stock in a private placement for $0.28 pershare, or an aggregate purchase price of approximately$17 million.  After completion of the proposed private placementand conversion of convertible preferred stock of GTC owned by LFB,LFB would own at least 90% of GTC’s outstanding Common Stock.Following the private placement, LFB would effect a short-formmerger in accordance with Massachusetts law cashing out allminority shareholders for $.28 per share.                      About GTC BiotherapeuticsFramingham, Mass.-based GTC Biotherapeutics, Inc. (OTC BB: GTCB)– http://www.gtc-bio.com/– develops, supplies and commercializes therapeutic proteins produced through transgenicanimal technology.  ATryn(R), GTC’s recombinant humanantithrombin, has been approved for use in the United States andEurope.  ATryn(R) is the first and only therapeutic productproduced in transgenic animals to be approved anywhere in theworld.In addition to ATryn(R), GTC is developing a portfolio ofrecombinant human plasma proteins with known therapeuticproperties.  These proteins include recombinant forms of humancoagulation factors VIIa and IX, which are being developed for thetreatment of patients with hemophilia, and recombinant alpha-fetoprotein, which is being developed for the treatment ofmyasthenia gravis and multiple sclerosis.The Company’s balance sheet at July 4, 2010, showed $30.39 millionin assets, $57,75 million in total assets, and a stockholder’sdeficit of $27.36 million.  Accumulated deficit has now reached$336.88 million.According to the Troubled Company Reporter on July 22, 2010,GTC Biotherapeutics, Inc. has negative working capital of$13.1 million as of April 4, 2010.  The Company had negativeworking capital of $16.1 million as of January 3, 2010.HANGER ORTHOPEDIC: Moody’s Assigns ‘B3′ Rating on $200-Mil. Notes—————————————————————–Moody’s Investors Service assigned a B3 rating to HangerOrthopedic Group, Inc.’s proposed $200 million senior unsecurednotes due 2018.  At the same time, Moody’s assigned a (P)Ba3rating to the proposed $100 million revolving credit facility due2015 and $325 million senior secured term loan B due 2016.  Inaddition, the Corporate Family and Probability of Default Ratingwere affirmed at B1.  The rating outlook is stable.The proceeds will be used to fund the acquisition of AcceleratedCare Plus Corporation for a purchase price of $155 million.  ACPis a provider of modality-based clinical programs for post-acuteand chronic rehabilitations patients.  The remaining proceeds willbe used to repay the company’s existing $220 million seniorsecured term loan and $175 million, 10.25% senior unsecured notes.These ratings and LGD assessments have been assigned:Hanger Orthopedic Group, Inc:Ratings assigned:  – $200 million senior unsecured notes due 2018 at B3 (LGD5,     84%);  – $325 million senior secured term loan B due 2016 at (P)Ba3     (LGD3, 30%);  – $100 million senior secured revolving credit facility due     2015 at (P)Ba3 (LGD3, 30%);Ratings affirmed:  – Corporate Family Rating at B1;  – Probability of Default Rating at B1;Ratings to be withdrawn at close of the transaction:  – $75 million secured revolver due 2011, at Ba2 (LGD2, 27%);  – $230 million secured term loan due 2013, at Ba2 (LGD2, 27%);  – $175 million unsecured senior notes due 2014, at B3 (LGD5,     81%);The outlook is stable.                        Ratings RationaleThe B1 corporate family rating is supported by the company’scompetitive position as the largest O&P (Orthotic & Prosthetic)services provider in the US, its national footprint and relativelystable, recurring revenue model.  In recent years, Hanger’shealthy top-line growth and operating efficiencies have led to areduction in financial leverage due to growth in EBITDA, bringingcredit metrics more in-line with a B1 rating.  The rating isconstrained primarily by the company’s modest size as well as therisks associated with the pricing and reimbursement environment inthe O&P industry.The stable outlook reflects Moody’s expectation for low to midsingle digit top-line growth driven by flat to slightly positivepricing, volume and mix benefits and tuck-in acquisitions.In order to offset the company’s modest size and reimbursementrisks, an upgrade of Hanger’s ratings would require a meaningfulimprovement in adjusted leverage and interest coverage ratiosthrough the repayment of debt or growth in EBITDA.  Specificallyif adjusted leverage was sustained under 3.0 times and adjustedinterest coverage (EBITDA less capital expenditures to interestexpense) of at least 3.0 times, Moody’s could change the outlookto positive or upgrade the ratings.  The successfulcommercialization of the WalkAide product could further supportupward ratings pressure.If the reimbursement or pricing environment is meaningfully morenegative than Moody’s has contemplated Moody’s could change theoutlook to negative or downgrade the ratings.  Further if costs ofgoods sold or labor costs rise considerably faster than priceincreases there could be downward pressure on the ratings.  Theratings could be downgraded if the ratio of adjusted debt/EBITDAwere to increases to more than 5.0 times or if free cash flow wereto become negative.  Further, a large debt-funded acquisitioncould result in downward rating pressure.Hanger Orthopedic Group, Inc., headquartered in Austin, TX, is theleading provider of orthotic and prosthetic (« O&P) patient-careservices in the US.  The company owns and operates 681 patientcare centers in 45 states and the District of Columbia.  Thecompany also generates roughly 12% of total revenues from its O&Pdistribution business.  For the twelve months ended June 30, 2010,the company recognized revenue of approximately $782 million.HANGER ORTHOPEDIC: S&P Raises Corporate Credit Rating to ‘BB-’————————————————————–Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said it raised its corporatecredit rating on Bethesda, Maryland-based orthotics- andprosthetics-focused patient care provider Hanger Orthopedic Inc.Group to ‘BB-’ from ‘B+’. »The upgrade reflects the company’s demonstrated ability to extendits record of steady revenue growth and margin expansion despiteweak economic conditions and minimal reimbursement rateincreases, » said Standard & Poor’s credit analyst Rivka Gertzulin.Since 2006, sales have grown 30% and operating margins haveexpanded from 17%-19%, contributing to a 49% increase in adjustedEBITDA.  In addition, the company’s planned acquisition ofrehabilitative products provider Accelerated Care Plus addsanother revenue stream (about 12% of pro forma revenue) that isnot directly exposed to reimbursement risk and has higher growthprospects and margins than Hanger’s core business.  Moreover, thecompany’s willingness to use excess cash and additional equity topartly finance the acquisition, underscores its financial policyto maintain adjusted leverage below 5x.At the same time, S&P assigned a ‘BB-’ issue-level rating and a’3′ recovery rating to the company’s proposed $425 million seniorsecured credit facility, consisting of a $100 million revolvingcredit facility and a $325 million term loan B.  S&P also assigneda ‘B’ issue-level rating and a ’6′ recovery rating to thecompany’s proposed $200 million of senior unsecured notes.Proceeds from the refinancing, in addition to $38 million of cashfrom the balance sheet and $15 million of new common equity willbe used to finance the acquisition of Accelerated Care Plus, andrepay the $221 million balance of the existing term loan due 2011and the $175 million senior note due 2014. »The ratings on Hanger reflect the risks of operating with anarrow focus in a difficult reimbursement environment, costinflation pressures, and its moderate debt burden, » added Ms.Gertzulin.HARRISBURG, PA: Has $330,000 Cash; Faces $1.2MM Payroll Next Week—————————————————————–Romy Varghese, writing for Dow Jones Newswires, reports thatRobert Kroboth, Harrisburg Mayor Linda Thompson’s interim chief ofstaff and finance director, said the city, as of Wednesdaymorning, only had $330,000 on hand.  Mr. Kroboth said during thehearing on the city’s application to the state program, known asAct 47, that Harrisburg has to make $1.2 million in payroll onOct. 27.Charles Thompson, at Patriot News, reports s Mr. Kroboth also saidHarrisburg has suspended about $2 million in payments for othergoods and services.Mr. Varghese reports that Pennsylvania’s community and economicdevelopment department staffers on Wednesday recommended thatHarrisburg fall under the state’s oversight program for distressedmunicipalities.  According to Dow Jones, the decision isultimately to be made within 30 days by the department’s secretaryAustin Burke, who is not required to follow the staff’srecommendation.  But some expect the announcement to be madequickly, given the severity of the city’s problems.Dow Jones relates Mr. Kroboth said negotiations with lenders forshort-term funds continue, although an attempt two weeks ago toline up a sale of short-term municipal notes failed because »potential lenders were not entirely comfortable with the ultimatepayoff of that short-term borrowing. »Dow Jones explains Pennsylvania’s program aims to stabilizemunicipalities under severe financial strain and set them on apath for sustainable fiscal health. Distressed cities get a state-appointed coordinator who drafts a recovery plan, and are eligiblefor other revenue sources unavailable to other local governments,such as a commuter tax.Harrisburg fits the criteria for a distressed city under theprogram since it missed $10.5 million in bond payments related toits incinerator project, as well as a variety of factors,including the city’s $4.8 million deficit, according to thedepartment’s report.Dow Jones further reports several residents urged a bankruptcyfiling.  According to Dow Jones, Neil Grover, a city attorney whois spearheading a residents’ group called Debt Watch Harrisburg,said portions of the city’s $288 million in debt racked up for afailed incinerator revamp — the main culprit of its problems –could be wiped out under a bankruptcy filing.  Mr. Groveradvocates a pre-packaged bankruptcy.Dow Jones relates Mr. Grover questioned Mr. Kroboth about theHarrisburg Parking Authority’s plan to refund its revenue bondsand provide the city as much as $75 million.  Mr. Kroboth said hedidn’t know about it until informed by a local newspaper reporterTuesday.Dow Jones also says several speakers stressed that bond holdersshould share the pain in any restructuring and recovery plan.On October 19, Dow Jones’ Varghese reported that Harrisburgreceived proposals from six firms that would advise the capitalcity on bankruptcy, according to city Councilman Brad Koplinski.The city council had authorized the search for firms to advise onbankruptcy, as well as the state’s oversight program fordistressed municipalities, late September.  The deadline forproposals was 4 p.m. EDT Tuesday.Dow Jones said public interviews of candidates would occur nextweek.  Names of the firms weren’t immediately available.                    About Harrisburg, PAThe city of Harrisburg is coping with debt related to a failedrevamp of an incinerator.  The outstanding principal on theIncinerator debt is $288 million.  Total principal and interest onthis debt would amount to approximately $458 million.  Debtservice payments on the total incinerator debt are $20 million peryear.  Of this total, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, is responsiblefor roughly $10 million and Harrisburg is responsible for theother $10 million.   The city is guarantor on 100% of the$288 million Incinerator debt.The City Council of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, voted 5-2 onSeptember 28 to seek professional advice on bankruptcy or stateoversight.  Harrisburg needed state aid to avoid default on $3.3million of bond payments this month.The city has missed about $8 million in debt-service payments thisyear on bonds issued in connection with a trash-to-energyincinerator.  The city owes another $40 million by the end of theyear, and was sued by its home county Dauphin County; bond insurerAssured Guaranty Municipal Corp., a unit of Assured Guaranty Ltd.;and bond trustees TD Bank and M&T Bank Corp. over $19 million inskipped bond payments.HORIZON NEVADA: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured Creditor———————————————————Debtor: Horizon Nevada LLC        220 E. Horizon Drive, #F        Henderson, NV 89015Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-29635Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Nevada (Las Vegas)Judge: Mike K. NakagawaDebtor’s Counsel: Charles T. Wright, Esq.                  PIET & WRIGHT                  3130 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 304                  Las Vegas, NV 89146                  Tel: (702) 566-1212                  Fax: (702) 566-4833                  E-mail: pwlawecf@gmail.coScheduled Assets: $1,025,900Scheduled Debts: $2,007,922The petition was signed by Alex Song.The list of unsecured creditors filed together with its petitioncontains only one entry:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————Southwest USA Bank                 220 E. Horizon Dr.,    $982,0224043 South Eastern Avenue          Henderson, NVLas Vegas, NV 89119HOST HOTELS: S&P Assigns ‘BB+’ Rating on $500 Mil. Senior Notes—————————————————————Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services assigned Bethesda, Md.-basedHost Hotels & Resorts L.P.’s proposed $500 million senior notesdue 2020 its ‘BB+’ issue-level rating (two notches higher thanS&P’s ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating on the company).  S&P alsoassigned this debt a recovery rating of ’1′, indicating itsexpectation of very high (90% to 100%) recovery for lenders in theevent of a payment default.  The company will use proceeds fromthe proposed notes issuance for the repayment of debt and generalcorporate purposes, including the funding of potential futureacquisitions.In addition, S&P affirmed all of its existing ratings on thecompany, including the ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating.  The ratingoutlook is stable.Any overallotment of the proposed $500 million issuance size wouldnot affect the rating assigned to the notes or the corporatecredit rating, as S&P expects that all incremental proceeds wouldbe used for debt repayment.The ‘BB-’ corporate credit rating on parent company Host Hotels &Resorts Inc. reflects Host’s highly leveraged financial riskprofile, reliance on external sources of capital for growth as areal estate investment trust, and the general cyclical nature ofthe lodging industry.  Additionally, although the rating andoutlook have always incorporated S&P’s view that Host would beginto deploy its large excess cash balances for hotel acquisitionsand investments, the valuation multiples for the company’srecently announced and completed acquisitions are somewhat higherthan its original expectations.  S&P believes that competition forhigh-quality assets in urban markets has driven acquisitionmultiples to an elevated level, and Host’s relatively aggressiveposture, in its view, will limit rating upside over the near termgiven the likelihood for a lower return on investment than S&Ppreviously projected.  Still, the company’s adequate liquidityprofile, high-quality and geographically diversified hotelportfolio within the U.S., strong brand relationships, andexperienced management team somewhat temper these risks.  S&Pbelieves that the improvement in the global lodging environment,as well as Host’s relatively prudent use of capital to expand itshotel portfolio with some balance between the use of debt andequity, will enable the company to improve credit measures overtime to be in line with the rating.S&P’s rating also reflects its belief that Host will continue totake a relatively prudent approach to financial risk management.Although S&P believes that valuations for recent acquisitions weresomewhat rich, the investments are consistent with Host’s long-term strategy of acquiring premium brand properties in key urbanmarkets.  S&P expects 2010 EBITDA to be up in the low-single-digitarea, with consideration given to the additional cash flow fromrecent acquisitions.  Consequently, S&P expects total lease-adjusted debt to EBITDA to decrease to about 7x by the end of2010, from about 8x at the end of 2009.  S&P expects net leverage(net of cash balances in excess of $200 million) to remainrelatively flat, in the mid-6x area, which is a bit weak for thecurrent ‘BB-’ rating, but adequate based on S&P’s favorable viewof Host’s business profile.  Additionally, S&P expects that EBITDAcoverage of interest will improve to the mid-2x area by the end of2010, from about 2x in the prior year.  Although S&P expectscredit measures to improve from year-end 2009 levels, higherrating potential would necessitate a higher level of RevPAR andEBITDA growth than S&P is currently anticipating, as well as anexpectation for sustained improvement across the industry.INFOLOGIX INC: Discloses NASDAQ Panel Decision to Delist Stock————————————————————–InfoLogix, Inc. disclosed that on October 21, 2010, it receivednotice that the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel (the « Panel »)has determined to delist the Company’s common stock from TheNASDAQ Stock Market and will suspend trading of the common stockeffective with the open of trading on October 21, 2010, as aresult of the Company’s non-compliance with the minimum $2.5million stockholders’ equity requirement, set forth in NasdaqListing Rule 5550(b)(2).The Company has been advised by Pink OTC Markets Inc, whichoperates an electronic quotation service for securities tradedover-the-counter, that its securities are eligible for quotationon the OTCQB, effective with the opening of trading on October 21,2010.  The OTCQB is a market tier for OTC traded companies thatare registered and reporting with the Securities and ExchangeCommission.  The Company has also been advised that its shareswill continue to trade under the symbol IFLG. Investors will beable to view real time stock quotes for IFLG athttp://www.otcmarkets.com.                      About InfoLogix, Inc.InfoLogix is a leading provider of enterprise mobility solutionsfor the healthcare and commercial industries. InfoLogix uses theindustry’s most advanced technologies to increase the efficiency,accuracy, and transparency of complex business and clinicalprocesses. With 19 issued patents, InfoLogix provides mobilemanaged solutions, on-demand software applications, mobileinfrastructure products, and strategic consulting services to over2,000 clients in North America including Kraft Foods, Merck andCompany, General Electric, Kaiser Permanente, MultiCare HealthSystem and Stanford School of Medicine. For more information visitwww.infologix.com.INNKEEPERS USA: Midland Opposes Committee Retention of Jefferies—————————————————————-Midland Loan Services, Inc., tells Judge Shelley Chapman that itcontinues to be concerned about the professional fees InnkeepersUSA Trust’s bankruptcy estates are being called upon to bear.Midland is concerned on its cash collateral that would be used tofund a substantial portion of the fees.The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors wants to retainJefferies & Company, Inc., as financial advisor and investmentbanker.Given the (i) relatively small amount of unsecured claims in thecases, (ii) onerous indemnification provisions in Jefferies’engagement letter, (iii) proposed financial advisor’s apparentconflicts of interest, and (iv) ambiguity of portions of thecompensation structure, the retention of a financial advisor assought in the application is not fair and reasonable and is notin the best interest of the estates, Midland points out.Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., U.S. Bank National Association, CWCapitalAsset Management LLC and C-III Asset Management LLC join inMidland’s objection.  Ronald F. Greenspan, a senior managingdirector in the corporate finance and restructuring practice ofFTI Consulting, Inc., submitted a declaration in support ofMidland’s objection.  The Greenspan declaration is subsequentlyreplaced with a declaration by Chris Dochat of FTI.                 Creditors’ Committee RespondsContrary to Midland’s assertions, the proposed amount and termsof Jefferies’ compensation and the scope of the indemnity to beprovided to it by the Debtors are customary and at market ratesfor similar services provided in comparable representations, theCreditors Committee contends.  The Creditors Committee alsoasserts that any actual claim for indemnification that might bebrought by Jefferies is subject to review and approval by theCourt for reasonableness.Notwithstanding Midland’s unsupported allegations, Jefferies is adisinterested party in the cases and does not have any conflictof interest that precludes it from being retained by theCreditors Committee, Brett H. Miller, Esq., at Morrison &Foerster LLP, in New York, tells the Court.  He adds that nothingin the Application or the Proposed Order compromises Midland’sright to object to the payment of fees to Jefferies.Judge Chapman approved the application and authorized theCreditors Committee to retain Jefferies.  The objections, to theextent not withdrawn at the hearing, are overruled.                   About Innkeepers USA TrustInnkeepers USA Trust is a self-administered Maryland real estateinvestment trust with a primary business focus on acquiringpremium-branded upscale extended-stay, mid-priced limited service,and select-service hotels.Innkeepers, through its indirect subsidiaries, owns and operatesan expansive portfolio of 72 upscale and mid-priced extended-stayand select-service hotels, consisting of approximately 10,000rooms, located in 20 states across the United States.Apollo Investment Corporation acquired Innkeepers in June 2007.Innkeepers USA Trust and a number of affilaites filed for Chapter11 on July 19, 2010 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-13800).Attorneys at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, serve as counsel to theDebtors.  AlixPartners is the restructuring advisor and Marc A.Beilinson is the chief restructuring officer.  Moelis & Company isthe financial advisor.  Omni Management Group, LLC, is the claimsand notice agent.  The petition estimated assets and debts of morethan $1 billion as of the bankruptcy filing.In 2009, Innkeepers’ consolidated revenues were approximately$292 million and adjusted EBITDA were approximately $85 million.The Company’s consolidated assets for 2009 totaled approximately$1.5 billion.  As of July 19, 2010, the Company and its affiliateshave incurred approximately $1.29 billion of secured debt.JAMES CHEELEY: Case Summary & 15 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————Debtor: James E. Cheeley        27447 N. Bay Road        Lake Arrowhead, CA 92352Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-43861Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Central District of California (Riverside)Judge: Meredith A. JuryDebtor’s Counsel: Stephen R. Wade, Esq.                  THE LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN R. WADE                  400 N. Mountain Avenue, Suite 214B                  Upland, CA 91786                  Tel: (909) 985-6500                  Fax: (909) 985-2865                  E-mail: dlr@srwadelaw.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 15 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/cacb10-43861.pdfJAPAN AIRLINES: Green Wants Surrender of 5th Ave. Building———————————————————-Green 461 Fifth Lessee LLC, the landlord of a building located at461 Fifth Avenue, in New York, asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York to compel Japan AirlinesInternational Co., Ltd., to vacate and surrender the premises.Edmond P. O’Brien, Esq., at Stempel Bennett Claman & HochbergP.C., in New York, relates that the Landlord received a letterfrom Eiji Katayama, the trustee of the Debtors, wherein heasserted the Lease is being rejected.However, Mr. O’Brien contends that he does not see how theJapanese Bankruptcy Trustee, per a letter, can purport toterminate a lease entered into in the United States with respectto leased premises located in the United States, which issomething typically done under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Codewhere a debtor has filed a full case under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11of Bankruptcy Code.In any event, assuming that the Japanese Bankruptcy Trustee hadthe authority to reject the Lease, and that Section 365 somehowapplies, neither Debtor nor Japanese Bankruptcy Trustee made aproper motion to the Court, which specifies the effective date ofthe Lease rejection, the date the tenant intended to surrenderpossession of the Premises to the Landlord or acknowledging thatthe Tenant or Japanese Bankruptcy Trustee intended to pay,forthwith and as an administrative obligation per Section365(d)(3), the postpetition rent due through the date of Tenant’ssurrender of possession, Mr. O’Brien asserts.In connection with the Landlord’s filing of its proof of claim inthe Japanese Proceeding in the Tokyo District Court, the Landlordretained a local counsel in Tokyo:  Takahiro Kawaguchi, Esq. ofK&L Gates, Mr. O’Brien tells the Bankruptcy Court.Mr. O’Brien says Mr. Kawaguchi has engaged in discussions withJapanese Bankruptcy Trustee to confute a date certain by whichTenant intends to vacate and surrender possession of the Premisesto the Landlord, however the Japanese Bankruptcy Trustee refusesto confirm a date certain by which Tenant intends to vacate andsurrender possession of the Premises. »And while Japanese Bankruptcy Trustee has orally indicated to Mr.Kawaguchi that Tenant intends to vacate and surrender possessionof the Premises as of October 22, 2010, Japanese BankruptcyTrustee will not confirm that date — or any other date, for thatmatter — in writing, » Mr. O’Brien notes.Mr. O’Brien further relates that the Tenant’s representative atthe Premises had previously indicated to the Landlord that Tenantintended to vacate and surrender possession of the Premises on orbefore September 30, 2010, which date has now passed.   However,he points out that the Tenant currently continues to occupy thePremises.                       About Japan AirlinesJapan Airlines Corporation — http://www.jal.co.jp/– is a Japan-based company mainly engaged in the provision of airtransport services.  The Company is active in five businesssegments through its 203 subsidiaries and 83 associated companies.JAL International Co. Ltd. is a wholly owned operating subsidiaryof Japan Airlines Corporation.Japan Airlines Corporation, Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd.and JAL Capital Co., Ltd., on January 19, 2010, filed thepetitions to commenced corporate reorganization proceedings withthe Tokyo District Court.  The Court appointed the EnterpriseTurnaround Initiative Corporation of Japan and Eiji Katayama,Esq., as reorganization trustees.Japan Airlines Corp. filed for reorganization January 19, 2010, inthe Tokyo District Court and filed a Chapter 15 petition in NewYork (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-10198).  The Company estimateddebts at $28 billion.JAPAN AIRLINES: In Talks With Lenders for Additional Loans———————————————————-Japan Airlines Corp.’s four biggest lenders agreed to provideJPY300 billion, or about US$3.7 billion, in additional loans tothe bankrupt airline, Bloomberg News said citing the Asahi Dailynewspaper.The four banks are Mizuho Financial Group Inc., Mitsubishi UFJFinancial Group Inc., Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc., andthe state-run Development Bank of Japan.  These banks, accordingto The Associated Press, citing Kyodo News, are in the final stageof talks with JAL to discuss terms of a loan of as much asJPY320 billion.Kazuo Inamori, chairman of Japan Airlines, told Kana Inagaki ofThe Wall Street Journal, that the company, together with theEnterprise Turnaround Initiative Corp., are trying to drum up newloans from JAL’s reluctant creditors as it plans to refinance itsroughly JPY300 billion debt by the end of March 2010. »We were able to transform into a company with high profitabilityduring the April-September period, » the Journal quoted Mr. Inamorias saying during a speech in Tokyo at the Foreign CorrespondentsClub of Japan.The additional financing will be used by the airline to finish itsrestructuring process by early next year, AP said.  JAL filed forbankruptcy protection early this year owing US$26 billion dollarsin one of Japan’s biggest-ever corporate failures.JAL delisted its shares from the stock market but the company,according to Bloomberg, citing Asahi, plans to list shares by theend of 2012.                       About Japan AirlinesJapan Airlines Corporation — http://www.jal.co.jp/– is a Japan-based company mainly engaged in the provision of airtransport services.  The Company is active in five businesssegments through its 203 subsidiaries and 83 associated companies.JAL International Co. Ltd. is a wholly owned operating subsidiaryof Japan Airlines Corporation.Japan Airlines Corporation, Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd.and JAL Capital Co., Ltd., on January 19, 2010, filed thepetitions to commenced corporate reorganization proceedings withthe Tokyo District Court.  The Court appointed the EnterpriseTurnaround Initiative Corporation of Japan and Eiji Katayama,Esq., as reorganization trustees.Japan Airlines Corp. filed for reorganization January 19, 2010, inthe Tokyo District Court and filed a Chapter 15 petition in NewYork (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-10198).  The Company estimateddebts at $28 billion.JAPAN AIRLINES: US DOT Tentatively OKs Antitrust Immunity Plea————————————————————–The United States Department of Transportation issued an ordertentatively approving an antitrust immunity application filed byAmerican Airlines and Japan Airlines.The approval, which came on October 6, will allow the two airlinesto enter into a joint venture after a final DOT order and approvalfrom the Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport andTourism, Thomas Gallagher of The Journal of Commerce Online saidin an October 11 report.Under an immunized agreement, the two airlines will cooperatecommercially on flights between North America and Asia whilecontinuing to operate as separate legal entities, the reportadded.                       About Japan AirlinesJapan Airlines Corporation — http://www.jal.co.jp/– is a Japan-based company mainly engaged in the provision of airtransport services.  The Company is active in five businesssegments through its 203 subsidiaries and 83 associated companies.JAL International Co. Ltd. is a wholly owned operating subsidiaryof Japan Airlines Corporation.Japan Airlines Corporation, Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd.and JAL Capital Co., Ltd., on January 19, 2010, filed thepetitions to commenced corporate reorganization proceedings withthe Tokyo District Court.  The Court appointed the EnterpriseTurnaround Initiative Corporation of Japan and Eiji Katayama,Esq., as reorganization trustees.Japan Airlines Corp. filed for reorganization January 19, 2010, inthe Tokyo District Court and filed a Chapter 15 petition in NewYork (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-10198).  The Company estimateddebts at $28 billion.JERRY BURKE: Case Summary & 2 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————Debtor: Jerry Devern Burke        249 NW 1st Ter        Deerfield, FL 33441Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-41664Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Southern District of Florida (Fort Lauderdale)Judge: Raymond B. RayDebtor’s Counsel: Chad T. Van Horn, Esq.                  330 N Andrews Ave #450                  Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301                  Tel: (954) 765-3166                  E-mail: chad@brownvanhorn.comScheduled Assets: $767,766Scheduled Debts: $1,343,934A list of the Debtor’s two largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/flsb10-41664.pdfJOHN CHICKERING, JR.: Case Summary & Creditors List—————————————————Debtor: John B. Chickering, Jr.        2715 Jalmia Drive        Los Angeles, CA 90046Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-54708Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Central District of California (Los Angeles)Judge: Sheri BluebondDebtor’s Counsel: Michael Jay Berger, Esq.                  9454 Wilshire Boulevard, 6th Floor                  Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2929                  Tel: (310) 271-6223                  Fax: (310) 271-9805                  E-mail: michael.berger@bankruptcypower.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 13 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/cacb10-54708.pdfJOSE MARTINEZ: Case Summary & 17 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————Debtor: Jose Octavio Martinez        4640 32nd Street        San Diego, CA 92116Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-18443Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Southern District of California (San Diego)Debtor’s Counsel: Roger Stacy, Esq.                  THE SOLUTIONS LAW CENTER, APC                  3665 Ruffin Road, Suite 310                  San Diego, CA 92123                  Tel: (858) 677-9085                  E-mail: roger@stacylawfirm.comEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 17 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/casb10-18443.pdfJUMBOLAIR INC: Gissy Offers to Buy Defaulted Note for $2 Million—————————————————————-Eric Morath, writing for Dow Jones’ Daily Bankruptcy Review,reports that Gissy Holdings II LLC has agreed to pay Taylor Bean &Whitaker Mortgage Corp.’s bankruptcy estate $2 million for theJumbolair Inc. mortgage note and a minority ownership stake in thedevelopment, pending bankruptcy court approval.Mr. Morath relates that, according to court papers, Jumbolair hasfailed to make payments on its $7.36 million mortgage sinceJanuary 2009.  The loan is secured by a lien on the runway andother community property, but not land and homes owned by Mr.Travolta and others.Jumbolair is a Florida development near Ocala, Florida, where jet-setting home owners, including actor John Travolta, can parkaircraft in their backyards.  The key feature of the Jumbolairestates is that every lot has access to a taxiway that allowshomeowners to move their aircraft directly from their property tothe massive runway.According to DBR, Mr. Travolta’s attorney Michael J. McDermott,Esq., said Wednesday efforts to foreclose on or sell the propertywere stymied when lender Taylor Bean filed for bankruptcyprotection later in 2009.  Mr. McDermott said once the sale iscomplete, the hope is that development will restart in thepartially finished community.                          About Taylor BeanTaylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. grew from a small Ocala-based mortgage broker to become one of the largest mortgagebankers in the United States.  In 2009, Taylor Bean was thecountry’s third largest direct-endorsement lender of FHA-insuredloans of the largest wholesale mortgage lenders and issuer ofmortgage backed securities.  It also managed a combined mortgageservicing portfolio of approximately $80 billion.  The companyemployed more that 2,000 people in offices located throughout theUnited States.Taylor Bean filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection August 24(Bankr. M.D. Fla. Case No. 09-07047).  Taylor Bean filed theChapter 11 petition three weeks after federal investigatorssearched its offices.  The day following the search, the FederalHousing Administration, Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac prohibited thecompany from issuing new mortgages and terminated servicingrights.  Taylor Bean estimated more than $1 billion in both assetsand liabilities in its bankruptcy petition.Edward J. Peterson, III, Esq., at Stichter, Riedel, Blain &Prosser, PA, in Tampa, Florida, represents the Debtor.  TroutmanSanders LLP is special counsel.  BMC Group, Inc., serves as claimsagent.KIMMIK CORPORATION: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary—————————————————–Debtor: The Kimmik Corporation, Inc.        dba 20 West Adams Street, Inc.        aka 20 West Adams Street, LLC        P.O. Box 40886        Jacksonville, FL 32203-0886Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09078Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville)Debtor’s Counsel: Brett A. Mearkle, Esq.                  PARKER & DUFRESNE, P.A.                  8777 San Jose Blvd., Suite 301                  Jacksonville, FL 32217                  Tel: (904) 733-7766                  Fax: (904) 733-2919                  E-mail: bmearkle@jaxlawcenter.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $500,001 to $1,000,000The Debtor did not file a list of its largest unsecured creditorstogether with its petition.The petition was signed by Marion Graham, Jr., president.L RAMON BONIN: Still Working on Projections, Wants Plan Extension—————————————————————–L. Ramon Bonin and Patty A. Bonin ask the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the Central District of California to extend their exclusiveperiods to file and solicit acceptances for the proposedChapter 11 Plan until November 15, 2010, and February 15, 2011,respectively.The Debtors filed their request for an extension before theexclusive periods was set to expire on October 15.The Debtors relate that they have been communicating with theirprincipal creditors Bank of America, City National Bank, CitizensBusiness Bank and Comerica Bank to propose a consensual plan ofreorganization.  In connection therewith, the Debtors presented aterm sheet to the lenders.  The lenders requested financialprojections to support the term sheet and the Debtors are workingon the projections with the assistance of Axis Business AdvisoryServices, LLC, the Debtors’ financial consultant.The Debtors need additional time to finalize the projectionsrequested, to continue with their communications with the lendersto propose a consensual reorganization plan, and to coordinatewith the related bankruptcy case of Dynamic.                       About L. Ramon BoninSan Juan Capistrano, California-based L. Ramon Bonin and Patty A.Bonin filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March 31, 2010(Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 10-14067).  James C. Bastian, Jr.,Esq., at Shulman Hodges & Bastian LLP, assists the Debtors intheir restructuring efforts.  The Debtors estimated their assetsand debts at $100 million to $500 million.L. STERLING: Case Summary & 11 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————-Debtor: L. Sterling Building Company, Inc.        10612 Winding Wood Trail        Raleigh, NC 27613Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-08510Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of North Carolina (Wilson)Judge: Stephani W. HumrickhouseDebtor’s Counsel: John A. Northen, Esq.                  NORTHEN BLUE, LLP                  P.O. Box 2208                  Chapel Hill, NC 27515-2208                  Tel: (919) 968-4441                  Fax: (919) 942-6603                  E-mail: jan@nbfirm.comScheduled Assets: $3,066,250Scheduled Debts: $2,575,970A list of the Company’s 11 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/nceb10-08510.pdfThe petition was signed by Lance S. Williams, president.LEHMAN BROTHERS: Creditors Back $45 Million SunCal Settlement————————————————————-Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.’s unsecured creditors have throwntheir weight behind a settlement between Lehman and the trusteeoverseeing SunCal Cos.’ bankruptcy that will see Lehman commit upto $45 million to restructure the California real estatedeveloper, Bankruptcy Law360 reports.Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. — http://www.lehman.com/– was the fourth largest investment bank in the United States.  For morethan 150 years, Lehman Brothers has been a leader in the globalfinancial markets by serving the financial needs of corporations,governmental units, institutional clients and individualsworldwide.Lehman Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy September 15, 2008(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 08-13555).  Lehman’s bankruptcy petitionlisted US$639 billion in assets and US$613 billion in debts,effectively making the firm’s bankruptcy filing the largest inU.S. history.  Several other affiliates followed thereafter.The Debtors’ bankruptcy cases are handled by Judge James M. Peck.Harvey R. Miller, Esq., Richard P. Krasnow, Esq., Lori R. Fife,Esq., Shai Y. Waisman, Esq., and Jacqueline Marcus, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges, LLP, in New York, represent Lehman.  EpiqBankruptcy Solutions serves as claims and noticing agent.On September 19, 2008, the Honorable Gerard E. Lynch, Judge of theU.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, enteredan order commencing liquidation of Lehman Brothers, Inc., pursuantto the provisions of the Securities Investor Protection Act (CaseNo. 08-CIV-8119 (GEL)).  James W. Giddens has been appointed astrustee for the SIPA liquidation of the business of LBIThe Bankruptcy Court has approved Barclays Bank Plc’s purchaseof Lehman Brothers’ North American investment banking andcapital markets operations and supporting infrastructure forUS$1.75 billion.  Nomura Holdings Inc., the largest brokeragehouse in Japan, purchased LBHI’s operations in Europe for US$2plus the retention of most of employees.  Nomura also boughtLehman’s operations in the Asia Pacific for US$225 million.                 International Operations CollapseLehman Brothers International (Europe), the principal UK tradingcompany in the Lehman group, was placed into administration,together with Lehman Brothers Ltd, LB Holdings PLC and LB UK REHoldings Ltd.  Tony Lomas, Steven Pearson, Dan Schwarzmann andMike Jervis, partners at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, have beenappointed as joint administrators to Lehman Brothers International(Europe) on September 15, 2008.  The joint administrators havebeen appointed to wind down the business.Lehman Brothers Japan Inc. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Japan Inc.filed for bankruptcy in the Tokyo District Court on September 16.Lehman Brothers Japan Inc. reported about JPY3.4 trillion(US$33 billion) in liabilities in its petition.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes Lehman BrothersBankruptcy News.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedingundertaken by Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., and other insolvencyand bankruptcy proceedings undertaken by its affiliates.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000) LIONS GATE: BC Securities Commission Grants Cease Trading Plea————————————————————–James Keegan,Chief Financial Officer of Lions Gate EntertainmentCorp., said the British Columbia Securities Commission heard andgranted on Oct. 18, 2010, an application to cease trading therights issued under the Shareholder Rights Plan Agreement datedJuly 1, 2010, between Lionsgate and CIBC Mellon Trust Company.                      About Lions GateBritish Columbia-domiciled and Santa Monica, California-headquartered Lions Gate is a leading, diversified independentproducer and distributor of motion pictures, home entertainment,television programming and animation worldwide and holds amajority interest in the pioneering CinemaNow VOD business.  TheLions Gate brand name is synonymous with original, cutting edge,quality entertainment in markets around the world.Lions Gate Entertainment Corp. reported total assets of$1,592,874,000 against total liabilities of $1,594,454,000,resulting in total deficiency of $1,580,000 as of June 30, 2010.As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on March 10, 2010,Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services revised its rating outlook onLions Gate to negative from stable.  At the same time, S&Paffirmed ratings on Lions Gate, including the ‘B-’ corporatecredit rating.Lions Gate carries Moody’s « B2″ corporate family rating andprobability of default rating.Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services revised the CreditWatchimplications on its ‘B-’ corporate credit rating for BritishColumbia, Canada-domiciled and Santa Monica, Calif.-headquarteredLions Gate Entertainment Corp. and its subsidiary, Lions GateEntertainment Inc., to developing from negative.  S&P initiallyplaced the rating on CreditWatch with negative implications onMarch 24, 2010, in response to investor Carl Icahn’s unsolicitedtender offer to acquire all outstanding shares of theentertainment company’s common stock.LUIS LONGORIA: Case Summary & 16 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————Debtor: Luis Longoria          dba La Valero Fuel and Service, LMTL, Inc.        20596 Crestline Drive        Diamond Bar, CA 91765Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-54625Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Central District of California (Los AngelesJudge: Peter CarrollDebtor’s Counsel: Michael R. Totaro, Esq.                  TOTARO & SHANAHAN                  P.O. Box 789                  Pacific Palisades, CA 90272                  Tel: (310) 573-0276                  Fax: (310) 496-1260                  E-mail: mtotaro@aol.comScheduled Assets: $1,859,795Scheduled Debts: $1,686,739A list of the Debtor’s 16 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/cacb10-54625.pdfM & A LAXMI: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————Debtor: M & A Laxmi, Inc.        dba Countryside Food Store        dba M & A Food Mart        1658 Timber Crossing Lane        Jacksonville, FL 32225Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09111Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville)Debtor’s Counsel: Brett A. Mearkle, Esq.                  PARKER & DUFRESNE, P.A.                  8777 San Jose Blvd., Suite 301                  Jacksonville, FL 32217                  Tel: (904) 733-7766                  Fax: (904) 733-2919                  E-mail: bmearkle@jaxlawcenter.comScheduled Assets: $1,206,360Scheduled Debts: $1,230,770A list of the Company’s six largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/flmb10-09111.pdfThe petition was signed by Shilpa H. Patel, president.MANHATTAN LOAN: Case Summary & 12 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: Manhattan Loan Company        2200 Northlake Parkway, Suite 277        Tucker, GA 30084Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09120Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville)Debtor’s Counsel: Robert P. Morrow, Jr., Esq.                  THE LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT P. MORROW, JR., P.A.                  225 East Church Street                  Jacksonville, FL 32202                  Tel: (904) 353-1000                  E-mail: robert.morrowpa@comcast.netEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 12 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/flmb10-09120.pdfThe petition was signed by Melton Harrell, president.MARIA SANTOS FRANCO: Case Summary & 13 Largest Unsecured Creditors——————————————————————Debtor: Maria Virginia Santos Franco        URB Montehiedra        163 Pitirre Street        San Juan, PR 00926Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09758Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Puerto Rico (Old San Juan)Debtor’s Counsel: Enrique M. Almeida Bernal, Esq.                  ALMEIDA & DAVILA PSC                  P.O. Box 191757                  San Juan, PR 00919-1757                  Tel: (787) 722-2500                  Fax: (787)722-2227                  E-mail: ealmeida@almeidadavila.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 13 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/prb10-09758.pdfMARKET DEVELOPMENT: Chapter 11 Reorganization Case Dismissed————————————————————The Hon. Harry C. Dees, Jr., of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theNorthern District of Alabama dismissed the Chapter 11 case ofMarket Development Specialists, Inc.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on July 26, 2010, theUnited States of America, on behalf of its agency, the InternalRevenue Service, asked for the dismissal of the Debtor’s casebecause the Debtor failed to file and likely failed to pay itsForm 941 FICA tax return for the first and second quarter 2010FICA taxes.Elkhart, Indiana-based Market Development Specialists, Inc. — dbaRetroBytes and Wintergreen Systems — filed for Chapter 11bankruptcy protection on April 1, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. Case No.10-31487).  John S. Hosinski, Esq., who has an office in SouthBend, Indiana, represented the Debtor in its restructuring effort.In its schedules, the Debtor disclosed $17,401,356 in assets and$25,137,362 in liabilities.MARKWEST ENERGY: Moody’s Assigns ‘B1′ Rating to $500 Mil. Notes—————————————————————Moody’s Investors Service assigned a B1 (LGD4, 65%) rating toMarkWest Energy Partners, L.P. proposed $500 million seniorunsecured notes due 2020.  The outlook remains stable.  MarkWestwill use the proceeds of the note offering to repay theoutstanding $375 million of senior notes due in 2014 with theremaining proceeds available for future capital investments in itsoperations which include natural gas gathering, transmission, andprocessing.                        Ratings Rationale »The incremental debt modestly increases leverage, however recentfinancial results and projected cash flow is sufficient to supportthe increased debt burden at the current Corporate Family Rating,or CFR, of Ba3, » said Stuart Miller, Moody’s Vice President.   »Inaddition, Moody’s take comfort from the partnership’s statedintention to continue to issue equity from time to time to fundits rapid expansion. »Since the last rating action on March 29, 2010, the partnershiphas issued $142 million of common equity, added new produceragreements that include significant acreage dedications, andentered into new strategic arrangements with NiSource FinanceCorporation (Baa3, stable) and Sunoco Logistics (Baa2, stable).These steps have strengthened the balance sheet and created theopportunity for cash flow growth.  However, the strategicarrangements will require capital investment which will likelylead to borrowings under the partnership’s credit facility or morecapital market activity in the future.MarkWest’s leverage ratio is one of the more important factors indetermining the partnership’s debt rating due to the underlyingbusiness risk of the partnership.  Pro forma for the offering,MarkWest’s ratio of debt to EBITDA will increase to 4.2x (usingMoody’s customary adjustments).  Moody’s CFR of Ba3 incorporatesthe steps the partnership has taken to reduce commodity price riskand volume risk through hedging and entering into fee-basedservice contracts.  However, a high level of risk remains, andwith the expectation of continuing, significant negative cash flowafter capital expenditures and distributions, Moody’s believe thecurrent ratings will come under pressure with the incurrence ofadditional debt if it is not balanced with a corresponding amountof new equity.To satisfy its liquidity needs, MarkWest relies on its seniorsecured revolving credit facility.  In July 2010, the partnershipamended its credit facility by increasing the amount to$705 million and by extending the maturity until July 2015.  Proforma for the new note offering, the entire amount of the facilitywill be available to fund capital expenditures or distributions tounit holders.  Therefore, near term liquidity is more thanadequate.A near term upgrade in the partnership’s rating is unlikely giventhe expectation for negative free cash flow for the foreseeablefuture coupled with its current leverage ratio.  A negative actioncould result if leverage increases to 5.0x either due to theissuance of additional debt or a fall off in operatingperformance.The last rating action affecting MarkWest occurred on March 29,2010, when Moody’s upgraded the CFR and Probability of Default toBa3 from B1 and upgraded the senior note rating to B1 (LGD4, 62%)from B2 (LGD 4, 65%).MarkWest Energy Partners, L.P., is headquartered in Denver,Colorado.MASSEY ENERGY: S&P Puts ‘BB-’ Rating to CreditWatch Developing————————————————————–Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said that it placed its ratingson Richmond, Va.-based Massey Energy Co., including its ‘BB-’corporate credit rating, on CreditWatch with developingimplications, which means that S&P could affirm, raise, or lowerthe ratings following completion of S&P’s review.The CreditWatch listing follows recent press reports suggestingthat Massey is exploring strategic options, including a sale toanother coal producer or a private-equity firm, an acquisition ofanother company, or remaining independent. »The outcome of the strategic alternatives could have a negativeeffect on S&P’s assessment of the company’s overall business andfinancial risk profiles, given the potential for a debt financedacquisition of another coal company or leveraged buyout by aprivate equity firm or strategic buyer, » said Standard & Poor’scredit analyst Marie Shmaruk.Alternatively, the company’s business and financial risk profilescould improve if it makes an acquisition that expands thecompany’s geographic and product diversity or it is acquired by astronger entity and any potential transaction is funded in such away that results in improved credit measures.S&P will monitor developments regarding the pursuit of strategicalternatives and assess its impact on Massey’s overall creditprofile if a transaction is announced or if one becomes lesslikely.MCCLATCHY COMPANY: Reports $12 Million Net Income for 3rd Quarter—————————————————————–The McClatchy Company reported net income in the third quarter of2010 of $12.1 million.  Adjusted earnings in the third quarter of2010, excluding unusual items, were $10.6 million.In the third quarter of 2009 the Company’s earnings fromcontinuing operations were $23.6 million.  Adjusted earnings fromcontinuing operations in the third quarter of 2009, excludingunusual items, were $11.0 million.Unusual items affecting the third quarter results in each year arediscussed below.Revenues in the third quarter of 2010 were $327.7 million, down5.7% from revenues of $347.4 million in the third quarter of 2009.Advertising revenues were $249.1 million, down 6.4%, andcirculation revenues were $66.4 million, down 3.8%.Cash operating expenses in the third quarter, excluding severancecosts, declined $10.7 million, or 4.2%, from the 2009 thirdquarter.Management noted that earnings in the third quarter of 2010benefited from the reversal of tax reserves and related interestas tax years in certain states closed.                     First Nine Months ResultsIncome from continuing operations in the first nine months of 2010was $17.4 million or 20 cents per share.  Adjusted earnings fromcontinuing operations, excluding several unusual items discussedbelow, were  $23.6 million or 28 cents per share.  Total netincome, including discontinued operations, was $21.4 million.Income from continuing operations for the first nine months of2009 was $27.9 million, or 33 cents per share, and was affectedby the unusual items discussed below.  Adjusted earnings fromcontinuing operations were $11.0 million, or 13 cents per share,in the first nine months of 2009.Revenues in the first nine months of 2010 were down 6.8% to $1.0billion compared to $1.1 billion in the 2009 period.  Advertisingrevenues in the 2010 period totaled $762.6 million, down 8.6%, andcirculation revenues were $203.7 million, down 1.5%.A full-text copy of the Earnings Release is available for freeat http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?6cc2                   About The McClatchy CompanySacramento, Calif.-based The McClatchy Company  (NYSE: MNI)– http://www.mcclatchy.com/– is the third largest newspaper company in the United States, publishing 30 daily newspapers, 43non-dailies, and direct marketing and direct mail operations.McClatchy also operates leading local websites in each of itsmarkets which extend its audience reach.  The websites offer userscomprehensive news and information, advertising, e-commerce andother services.  Together with its newspapers and direct marketingproducts, these interactive operations make McClatchy the leadinglocal media company in each of its premium high growth markets.McClatchy-owned newspapers include The Miami Herald, TheSacramento Bee, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, The Kansas CityStar, The Charlotte Observer, and The News & Observer (Raleigh).                          *     *     *The Troubled Company Reporter said on Feb. 15, 2010, Moody’sInvestors Service upgraded The McClatchy Company’s CorporateFamily Rating to Caa1 from Caa2, Probability of Default Rating toCaa1 from Caa2, and senior unsecured and unguaranteed note ratingsto Caa2 from Caa3, concluding the review for upgrade initiated onJanuary 27, 2010.  The upgrades reflect McClatchy’s improvedliquidity position and reduced near-term default risk followingcompletion of the company’s refinancing, and its ability tostabilize EBITDA performance through significant cost reductions.The rating outlook is stable.MEG ENERGY: S&P Raises Corporate Credit Rating to ‘BB’——————————————————Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said it raised its long-termcorporate credit rating on MEG Energy Corp. to ‘BB’ from ‘BB-’based on the company’s successful track record with projectexecution and ability to keep debt at moderate levels during theinitial stages of its in-situ oil sands steam-assisted gravitydrainage development projects.  The outlook is stable.  At thesame time, Standard & Poor’s raised its rating on the company’ssenior secured debt outstanding to ‘BBB-’ from ‘BB+’.  The ’1′recovery rating on the debt is unchanged.  S&P removed the ratingsfrom CreditWatch with positive implications, where S&P placed themJune 24, 2010.The upgrade reflects S&P’s belief that MEG has maintained astronger financial risk profile relative to those of many otherrated companies with start-up SAGD projects, due to the largeproportion of private equity raised since the company’s inceptionand its recently completed IPO. »With the completion of its first two development phases, MEG’sdaily average production is still fairly small; however, based onthe pace of production ramp-up to date, S&P expects the companyshould be able to sustain its production levels at design capacityduring S&P’s 12-24 month forecast period, » said Standard & Poor’scredit analyst Michelle Dathorne.   »Although S&P expects debtlevels will likely increase slightly as MEG works to complete its35,000 barrels per day Phase 2B expansion, S&P neverthelessbelieve MEG’s cash flow protection metrics will strengthen tolevels commensurate with the ‘BB’ rating.  At present, S&P’sanalysis of the company’s financial risk profile has placedgreater emphasis on its capital structure; however, debt-to-EBITDAwill take on greater significance as production increases, » Ms.Dathorne added.The ratings on MEG reflect Standard & Poor’s assessment of thecompany’s weak cash flow generation, below-average profitabilityduring the initial phases of its multiyear steam-assisted gravitydrainage project development, and discounted realized crude oilprices.  In S&P’s opinion, the company’s large high-qualityresource base, good visibility to long-term production growth, andcompetitive full-cycle cost profile offset these weaknesses.In S&P’s view, MEG’s satisfactory business risk profile reflectsits current low profitability during the initial phases of projectdevelopment, and the discounted realized crude oil pricesassociated with its low API gravity bitumen production.  S&Pbelieves the investment-grade characteristics associated with thecompany’s large high-quality resource base, visibility to long-term production growth, and competitive cost profile offset theseweaknesses.  As MEG’s production levels have been relatively lowduring the development and production ramp-up of Phases 1 and 2,the company’s return on capital employed has so far beennegligible.  Based on the project’s full-cycle costs, whichStandard & Poor’s estimates at C$25-C$26 per barrel (includingsustaining capital of about C$5 per barrel), MEG should generatestrong netbacks at midcycle crude oil prices, despite earning adiscounted price for its low API gravity bitumen production; andthe incremental costs associated with the diluent, which furtherdiscount the potential realized netback.The stable outlook reflects Standard & Poor’s expectation that MEGEnergy will continue its effective cost management of the multi-stage development of its Christina Lake in-situ oil sands assets,and specifically that the company will complete its 35,000 barrel-per-day Phase 2B expansion without unduly compromising its balancesheet.  As MEG has attracted a significant amount of equityfinancing to complete its development projects to date, thecompany’s capital structure, with fully adjusted debt-to-capitalof 25.6% at June 30, 2010, is significantly underlevered relativeto its SAGD and conventional upstream rating peer group.  In S&P’sview, MEG’s ability to remain underlevered has strengthened itsfinancial risk profile.  Since existing cash resources aresufficient to fund the majority of the Phase 2B development costs,S&P believes the company’s total debt levels should only increasemarginally until 2012.  As a result, its debt-to-EBITDA, which S&Phas previously not emphasized in S&P’s credit analysis, couldimprove to 3.0x-3.5x, after production ramps up to the cumulative60,000 barrels per day design capacity following completion of thePhase 2B expansion.  If the company achieves and sustains debt-to-EBITDA in this range, S&P would raise the rating to ‘BB+’.  As thePhase 2B construction and project ramp-up will not occur until2013, and the ratings are unlikely to rise before the Phase 2Bramp-up occurs, the outlook’s tenor is longer than would becustomary at the ‘BB’ rating level.  Although S&P attributes a lowprobability of a negative rating action occurring in 2011 and2012, S&P could lower the ratings if there is a material increasein Phase 2B costs that the company elects to fund with debt, orproduction economics weaken due to rising full-cycle costs.MEREDITH WINBORN: Case Summary & 10 Largest Unsecured Creditors—————————————————————Debtor: Meredith Joyce Winborn        2171 South El Camino Real, #203        Oceanside, CA 92054Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-18492Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Southern District of California (San Diego)Judge: Louise DeCarl AdlerDebtor’s Counsel: Arthur Stockton, Esq.                  STOCKTON LAW OFFICES                  27322 Calle Arroyo, Suite 36D                  San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675                  Tel: (866) 682-8776                  Fax: (866) 207-4082                  E-mail: art@stocktonlawoffices.comEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 10 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/casb10-18492.pdfMERUELO MADDUX: Legendary & Hartland Plans Sent to Creditors————————————————————Bankruptcy Law360 reports that a judge has signed off on a pair ofamended disclosure statements from rival parties in the MerueloMaddux Properties Inc. bankruptcy, setting the stage for creditorsto debate a set of proposals to revive the hobbled real estatecompany.Judge Kathleen Thompson of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theCentral District of California on Tuesday approved competingreorganization plans from Meruelo equity holders CharlestownCapital Advisors LLC and Hartland.Judge Thompson approved the disclosure statement explaining theChapter 11 plan proposed by management in early August.Three parties have filed competing plans for Meruelo Maddux:  (1) The Company.       – The plan provides for the payment in full of all claims          over time with interest.  The secured claims will be          paid interest only over the term of the Plan and the          principal balance will be paid either through the sale          of the property securing the claim or the refinance of          the secured debt.  PI shareholders will retain their          shares in MMPI.  General unsecured creditors will be          paid within 30 days after the effective date with          interest from the Petition Date at 5% per annum.          Holders of unsecured claims will be paid in the full          amount of their claims over 5 years from the effective          date.          See http://bankrupt.com/misc/MMP_MgtPlan_091510.pdf  (2) Lenders Legendary Investors Group No. 1 LLC and East West      Bank.       – The plan’s foundation is an $80 million          recapitalization via a $5 million cash infusion by          Legendary, conversion of about $65 million of debt to          equity and a $10 million rights offering to holders of          Meruelo Maddux existing common stock.  East West will          receive 70% to 80% of the stock of the reorganized          company.  Holders of unsecured claims will receive a          cash payment equal to 100% of the amount of their          allowed claims on the effective date, plus simple          interest at 5% per annum for the period from the          petition date through the date each allowed claim is          paid.  Interest will be at the Federal Judgment Rate if          the creditors vote to reject the plan.  Holders of the          existing stock will receive 20% of the stock in the          reorganized company.          See http://bankrupt.com/misc/MMP_LendersPlan_091010.pdf  (3) Existing shareholders Charlestown Capital Advisors LLC and      Hartland Asset Management Corp.       – Under the plan, MMPI will receive a $31 million cash          investment from Charleston and Hartland-led investors          and from a rights offering made available to existing          MMPI shareholders.  Non-insider general unsecured          creditors will be paid in full with interest as soon as          the plan becomes effective.  Holders of secured claims          will receive monthly interest payments at 5.25% for four          years with full payment on the principal balance four          years after the effective date.  Reorganized MMPI will          issue to existing holders of MMPI interests, if they          elect to receive stock instead of cash, will receive          up to 26% of the total stock of the reorganized company.          Stockholders can also purchase up to 19% of the stock in          an $8 million rights offering.          See http://bankrupt.com/misc/MMP_ShareholdersPlan_091510.pdfThe Creditors Committee is recommending that creditors turn downthe management plan.  The Committee supports the lenders’ plan.The Committee noted that the lenders’ plan will pay creditors infull with interest shortly after plan confirmation while thecompany plan would pay creditors in full over five years.The Company has said that East West is taking a predatory actionby converting real estate debt into a controlling interest in acompany.  East West also appears to be proposing it use TARP moneyobtained by the federal government as a part of its effort tocomplete its hostile takeover of Meruelo Maddux.Charleston and Hartland are represented by:      Christopher E. Prince, Esq.      Matthew A. Lesnick, Esq.      Andrew R. Cahill, Esq.      LESNICK PRINCE LLP      185 Pier Avenue, Suite 103      Santa Monica, CA 90405      Tel: (213) 291-8984      Fax: (310) 396-0963      E-mail: cprince@lesnickprince.com              matt@lesnickprince.com              acahill@lesnickprince.comLegendary Investors is represented by:      Jeremy V. Richards, Esq.      Jeffrey W. Dulberg, Esq.      PACHULSKI STANG ZIEHL & JONES LLP      10100 Santa Monica Blvd., 11th Floor      Los Angeles, CA 90067-4100      Tel: (310) 277-6910      Fax: (310) 201-0760      E-mail: jrichards@pszjlaw.com              jdulberg@pszjlaw.com           - and -      Surjit P. Soni, Esq.      THE SONI LAW FIRM      35 N. Lake Ave., Suite 720      Pasadena, CA 91101      Tel: (626) 683-7600      Fax: (626) 683-1199      E-mail: surj@sonilaw.comEast West Bank is represented by:      Curtis C. Jung, Esq.      Monica H. Lin, Esq.      JUNG & YUEN, LLP      888 South Figueroa Street, Suite 720      Los Angeles, CA 90017      Tel: (213) 689-8880      Fax: (213) 689-8887      E-mail: curtis@jyllp.com           - and -      Elmer Dean Martin III, Esq.      22632 Golden Springs Dr., Suite 190      Diamond Bar, CA 91765      Tel: (909) 861-6700      Fax: (909) 860-3801      E-mail: elmer@bankruptcytax.netThe Creditors Committee is represented by;      Victor A. Sahn, Esq.      Dean G. Rallis Jr., Esq.      Asa S. Hami, Esq.      Tamar Kouyoumjian, Esq.      SULMEYERKUPETZ      333 South Hope Street, 35th Floor      Los Angeles, CA 90071-1406      Tel: (213) 626-2311      Fax: (213) 629-4520      E-mail: vsahn@sulmeyerlaw.com              drallis@sulmeyerlaw.com              ahami@sulmeyerlaw.com              tkouyoumjian@sulmeyerlaw.com                         About Meruelo MadduxMeruelo Maddux and its affiliates filed for Chapter 11 protectionon March 26, 2009 (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Lead Case No. 09-13356).Aaron De Leest, Esq., John J. Bingham, Jr., Esq., and John N.Tedford, Esq., at Danning Gill Diamond & Kollitz, represent theDebtors in their restructuring effort.  The Creditors Committee isrepresented by Victor A. Sahn, Esq., Dean G. Rallis Jr., Esq., AsaS. Hami, Esq., and Tamar Kouyoumjian, Esq., at SULMEYERKUPETZ.The Debtors’ financial condition as of December 31, 2008, showed$681,769,000 in assets and $342,022,000 of debts.MESA AIR: Creditors Committee to Get Co-Exclusivity for Plan————————————————————The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mesa Air Group,Inc., and certain of its direct and indirect subsidiaries in theseChapter 11 cases, as debtors and debtors-in-possession, filed astatement in connection with the Debtors’ request for a secondextension of their exclusive period to propose and solicitacceptances of a Chapter 11 plan.The Court’s August 12, 2010 Order extends the Debtors’ ExclusivePlan Proposal Period to October 21, 2010, and ExclusiveSolicitation Period to December 22, 2010, and requires theCreditors’ Committee to file and serve any objection byOctober 8, 2010, in the event the Committee objects to anyfurther extension of exclusivity.Barring an objection by the Creditors’ Committee, the Debtors’Exclusive Plan Proposal Period and Exclusive Solicitation Periodwill be automatically extended an additional 41 days toDecember 1, 2010, and February 1, 2011.Brett H. Miller, Esq., at Morrison & Foerster LLP, in New York,relates that the Creditors’ Committee raised certain informalconcerns with the Debtors regarding their continued exclusivity.In resolution of those concerns and in lieu of filing anobjection to the Motion, the Debtors have consented to providingthe Committee with co-exclusivity to file and solicit a plan ofreorganization, effective January 15, 2011.The Debtors and Creditors’ Committee intend to submit a form ofstipulated order formalizing the agreement regarding co-exclusivity as soon as practicable, Mr. Miller informs the Court.                     About Mesa Air GroupMesa currently operates 130 aircraft with approximately 700 dailysystem departures to 127 cities, 41 states, Canada, and Mexico.Mesa operates as Delta Connection, US Airways Express and UnitedExpress under contractual agreements with Delta Air Lines, USAirways and United Airlines, respectively, and independently asMesa Airlines and go! Mokulele.  This operation links Honolulu tothe neighbor island airports of Hilo, Kahului, Kona and Lihue.TheCompany, founded by Larry and Janie Risley in New Mexico in 1982,has approximately 3,500 employees.Mesa Air Group Inc. and its units filed their Chapter 11 petitionsJan. 5 in New York (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-10018), listingassets of $976 million against debt totaling $869 million as ofSept. 30, 2009.Richard M. Pachulski, Esq., and Laura Davis Jones, Esq., atPachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP, serve as local counsel.Imperial Capital LLC is the investment banker.  Epiq BankruptcySolutions is claims and notice agent.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes Mesa Air BankruptcyNews.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedings undertakenby Mesa Air Group Inc. and its units.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000). MESA AIR: Disclosure Statement Hearing Postponed to Nov. 10———————————————————–The hearing on the Disclosure Statement explaining the JointChapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Mesa Air Group, Inc., and itsdebtor subsidiaries, and the motion for its approval, has beenadjourned to November 10, 2010, at 2:00 p.m., prevailing EasternTime, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard.The Disclosure Statement hearing was previously scheduled forOctober 26, 2010.Responses, objections and proposed modifications to theDisclosure Statement and the Motion to Approve must be receivedby November 3, 2010, at 4:00 p.m., prevailing Eastern Time.Untimely objections may not be heard at the Disclosure Statementhearing.The Disclosure Statement hearing may be adjourned or continuedfrom time to time by the Debtors or the United States BankruptcyCourt for the Southern District of New York without furthernotice to creditors or parties-in-interest other than anannouncement at the hearing or at a later hearing, or by noticeon the Court’s docket.                        The Chapter 11 PlanMesa Air Group, Inc., and its affiliated debtors and debtors-in-possession delivered to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theSouthern District of New York a Joint Plan of Reorganization anda Disclosure Statement in support of the Joint Plan onSeptember 17, 2010.The Plan provides for these terms:    * The Plan effectuates a reorganization of the Debtors      through the issuance of New Common Stock by the ultimate      corporate parent, Reorganized Mesa Air Group, which, on      the effective date of the Plan, will be deemed to own all      of the ownership interests in the other Reorganized      Debtors; New 8% Notes and U.S. Air Note issued by      Reorganized Mesa Air Group; and New Warrants to acquire      shares of the New Common Stock, and the preservation of      the Debtors’ business operations and going concern value.      The Debtors will distribute (i) New Common Stock to      holders of Allowed Class 3 Claims and Allowed Class 5      Claims that are U.S. Citizens, and (ii) New Warrants to      all holders of Allowed Class 3 Claims that are Non-U.S.      Citizens.    * Holders of Interests will neither receive nor retain any      property under the Plan.    * The Plan will be funded by way of the Debtors’ cash on      hand, revenues from ordinary course operations, and      proceeds of asset sales.    * There will be no substantive consolidation of the Debtors’      Estates under the Plan.    * As consideration for entry into the U.S. Airways Code-      Share Tenth Amendment, U.S. Airways, Inc. will receive      approximately 10% of the New Common Stock, and the      Management Equity Pool will be reserved for distribution      under the management/employee equity incentive plan that      will be established by the Reorganized Board.    * Pursuant to the Plan, each U.S.-Citizen holder of an      Allowed General Unsecured Claim will be allocated its      share of New Common Stock and the New 8% Notes.  Each non-      U.S.-Citizen holder of an Allowed General Unsecured Claim      will be allocated its share of New Warrants and the New 8%      Notes.    * There will be a separate convenience class comprising De      Minimis Convenience Claims, which are general unsecured      claims of $100,000 or less, and which will receive certain      percentages in cash payment.  Other than Noteholders,      unsecured creditors will be allowed to opt into the      convenience claim class if desired.    * All existing Interests in Mesa Air Group will be      extinguished and the holders of the Interests will not      receive or retain any property on account of the      Interests.  Reorganized Mesa Air Group will be vested      directly or indirectly with the Interests in the      Reorganized Debtor Subsidiaries and the Liquidating      Debtors.    * Intercompany Claims will be taken into account in      assessing the value of the applicable Debtors, but Holders      of Intercompany Claims will not directly receive or retain      any property on account of the Claims under the Plan.    * All other senior Allowed Claims, including Administrative      Claims, Priority Tax Claims, Priority Non-tax Claims, and      Secured Claims, will be paid or otherwise satisfied      pursuant to the terms of the Plan.Full-text copies of the Plan and the Disclosure Statement,including the liquidation analysis and financial projections, areavailable at no charge at:  http://bankrupt.com/misc/Mesa_Ch11Plan091710.pdf  http://bankrupt.com/misc/Mesa_DisclosureStatement091710.pdfThe Debtors are targeting a hearing on the confirmation of thePlan at 10:00 a.m., Eastern Time, on December 15, 2010.                     About Mesa Air GroupMesa currently operates 130 aircraft with approximately 700 dailysystem departures to 127 cities, 41 states, Canada, and Mexico.Mesa operates as Delta Connection, US Airways Express and UnitedExpress under contractual agreements with Delta Air Lines, USAirways and United Airlines, respectively, and independently asMesa Airlines and go! Mokulele.  This operation links Honolulu tothe neighbor island airports of Hilo, Kahului, Kona and Lihue. TheCompany, founded by Larry and Janie Risley in New Mexico in 1982,has approximately 3,500 employees.Mesa Air Group Inc. and its units filed their Chapter 11 petitionsJan. 5 in New York (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-10018), listingassets of $976 million against debt totaling $869 million as ofSept. 30, 2009.Richard M. Pachulski, Esq., and Laura Davis Jones, Esq., atPachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP, serve as local counsel.Imperial Capital LLC is the investment banker.  Epiq BankruptcySolutions is claims and notice agent.Bankruptcy Creditors’ Service, Inc., publishes Mesa Air BankruptcyNews.  The newsletter tracks the Chapter 11 proceedings undertakenby Mesa Air Group Inc. and its units.(http://bankrupt.com/newsstand/or 215/945-7000). METALDYNE LLC: Moody’s Affirms ‘B1′ Corporate Family Rating———————————————————–Moody’s Investors Service affirmed the B1 Corporate Family andProbability of Default Ratings of Metaldyne, LLC, following thecompany’s upsizing of its proposed senior secured term loanfacility to $250 million from $225 million.  Moody’s also affirmedthe B1 rating of the resized term loan.  The rating outlook isstable.  Proceeds from the $25 million increase of the term loanwill be used to fund a correspondingly higher distribution to thecompany’s shareholders (including the company’s lead sponsors, TheCarlyle Group and Solus Alternative Asset Management LP).In affirming the B1 ratings Moody’s said that Metaldyne’sleverage will increase modestly as a result of the term loanupsizing.  However, due to increased market demand, the interestrate on the term loan will be lower than originally anticipated.Consequently, key debt service metrics will largely remain in linewith Moody’s earlier expectations, and the company’s overall riskprofile remains unchanged.These ratings were affirmed:  – Corporate Family Rating, B1;  – Probability of Default, B1;  – B1 (LGD3, 44%), for the $250 million senior secured term loanThe last rating action was on September 30, 2010, when the B1Corporate Family Rating was assigned.Metaldyne, LLC, is a global manufacturer of highly engineeredmetal-based components for light vehicle engine, transmission anddriveline applications for the global automotive light vehiclemarket.  The company is wholly owned subsidiary of MD InvestorsCorporation which itself is owned by a coalition of investors ledby The Carlyle Group and Solus Alternative Asset Management LP.METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER: Icahn Wants to Buy Debt; Nixes Spyglass Deal—————————————————————–Entities affiliated with Carl Icahn are offering holders of seniorsecured loans of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. the right to put loansto Icahn Affiliates at a purchase price of $0.45 per $1.00 inprincipal amount on a first-come, first-served basis.  The offerwill give participating holders of Senior Loans the right to keepthe upside on their MGM position, if there is one, without takingrisk on the downside.The offer is conditioned on a minimum of $963,000,000 in principalamount in Senior Loans participating in the offer.  If this amountparticipates in the offer, and the other conditions to the offerare met, Mr. Icahn will be obligated to accept that amount on afirst-come, first-served basis.  Mr. Icahn reserves the right toaccept more Senior Loans in the offer but is not obligated to doso.The offer will expire at the voting deadline for the MGM/SpyglassPrepackaged Plan on October 29, 2010, unless extended by Mr.Icahn’s affiliates in their sole discretion.American Bankruptcy Institute has said that MGM’s decision onFriday to extend the voting period for a pre-packaged bankruptcyplan to Oct. 29 bodes well for the Carl Icahn-backed counterplansubmitted to the studio last week.The put will be usable and exercisable by participating lendersfrom October 29, 2010, until two weeks after the date MGM exitsbankruptcy or for one year, whichever comes first.Participating lenders will be required to vote against theSpyglass Plan and will be required to grant a proxy to Mr. Icahn.Those voting rights will continue through the exercise period ofthe put right.Mr. Icahn stated that he is firmly opposed to MGM’s currentproposed Spyglass Plan and the related transaction with Spyglass.He characterized the Spyglass Plan as a « prescription fordisaster ».Mr. Icahn noted that « the plan is being backed by certain membersof the MGM creditors committee, and is being ramrodded throughwith the typical fear tactic that the « sky will fall » if the planis not approved. »  Mr. Icahn stated that he believes that « it ismore likely for the sky to fall if the Spyglass Plan wasapproved. »Mr. Icahn further stated: This is the critical decision point forMGM lenders, yet we are being rushed into an extraordinaryPrepackaged Plan with limited information and input, on a « hurryup basis » that frustrates any dissent.  I hope to defeat this »rush to judgment ». »I URGE ALL SENIOR LENDERS TO VOTE AGAINST THE SPYGLASS PLAN, evenif they do not wish to accept our offer.  A ‘No’ vote will forcean open and transparent process to allow all lenders the full andfair opportunity to evaluate all information and obtain complete,unbiased analysis regarding all offers and opportunities that maybe available for MGM.  It is interesting to note that Lionsgatehas made an offer but their request to put it out publicly hasbeen refused.  It has also come to my attention that at least oneother offer has been made which has not been made public by MGM orthe MGM creditors committee.  It is my intention to bring all ofthese offers to light.  WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW OURSELVES TO BERAILROADED INTO THE SPYGLASS PLAN, » Mr. Icahn said.To be eligible for the offer, holders must own Senior Loans issuedunder the April 2005 MGM Credit Facility as of the October 4, 2010record date for the Spyglass Plan and must have voted against thatplan. The offer will be conditioned on the Spyglass Plan beingrejected.  The offer is subject to the terms and conditions of thedefinitive offer documents which are available from theInformation Agent.Any questions or requests for assistance or documents, includingdefinitive Icahn offer documents, may be directed to Innisfree M&AIncorporated, the Information Agent for the offer, at:          Innisfree M&A Incorporated          501 Madison Avenue, 20th Floor          New York, NY 10022          Toll-Free: (888) 750-5833                           *     *     *The Wall Street Journal’s Mike Spector and Lauren A. E. Schukerreport that MGM’s debt currently trades around 45 cents, so Mr.Icahn’s deal doesn’t offer creditors any premium.According to the Journal, people familiar with the matter said Mr.Icahn for weeks has privately been trying to rally dissidentcreditors to his cause.The Journal also notes a small MGM creditors committee — whichincludes J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Anchorage Advisors and HighlandCapital Management — held several merger talks with Lions Gateover the summer, but the two sides disagreed on how to value thetwo studios.As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on October 13, 2010,Claudia Eller, writing for The Los Angeles Times, said peopleclose to the matter indicated that Lions Gate made another mergerproposal to MGM lenders, which would give the MGM lenders a 55%stake in the merged company.The Journal’s Mr. Spector and Ms. Schuker report that MGM’slargest creditors have balked at the offer, countering that MGM isworth close to $2 billion — twice Lions Gates’ current marketcapitalization.Mr. Icahn, who is Lions Gate’s largest shareholder, with over 37%ownership as of end August, also holds half a billion dollars ofMGM’s debt.                        Prepack BankruptcyAs reported by the Troubled Company Reporter on October 8, 2010,MGM has begun a solicitation of votes from its secured lenders fora pre-packaged plan of reorganization.  MGM expects to continuenormal business operations throughout the restructuring process.The Plan provides for MGM’s employees, vendors, participants,guilds, and licensees to be unimpaired.The Plan provides for MGM’s secured lenders to exchange more than$4 billion in outstanding debt for approximately 95.3% of equityin MGM upon its emergence from Chapter 11.  Spyglass Entertainmentwould contribute certain assets to the reorganized company inexchange for approximately 0.52% of the reorganized company.  Inaddition, two entities owned by Spyglass affiliates — CypressEntertainment Group, Inc. and Garoge, Inc. — will merge with andinto a subsidiary of MGM, with the MGM subsidiary as the survivingentity.  The stockholders of Cypress and Garoge will receiveapproximately 4.17% of the reorganized company in exchange.Following the receipt of the requisite consents from securedlenders during the solicitation period, and to implement the debtrestructuring, MGM intends to commence pre-packaged Chapter 11cases under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and seek confirmation of thePlan.  Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum, currently Co-Chairman andChief Executive Officer of Spyglass Entertainment, would serve asthe Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of MGM following thecompany’s emergence from Chapter 11.The deadline for the Company’s secured lenders to vote on the Planis October 22, 2010, unless extended.  Only holders of secureddebt as of October 4, 2010 under MGM’s April 8, 2005 CreditAgreement will be solicited.The Wall Street Journal’s Mike Spector and Lauren A. E. Schukerreport that if MGM gets enough creditor support, it hopes to spendroughly two months under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.  Whenit exits bankruptcy, MGM’s ambitions will be scaled back to makingonly a handful of new movies each year.  The studio plans to tap anew $500 million credit line to finance new film production,people familiar with the matter said, far less than the companyhad originally envisioned.MGM is grappling with $3.7 billion in debt.  MGM has received aseries of forbearance agreements from its bondholders and lenders,wherein the lenders extended the period during which MGM won’thave to pay principal and interest on its bank debt, including arevolving credit facility.  The latest forbearance agreementexpires October 29.MGM tried to sell itself in March 2010 but received low bids.According to The Wall Street Journal, Sahara India Pariwar offereda bit more than $2 billion for MGM in September, but the studio’screditors rejected the overture.MGM has hired investment bank Moelis & Company and the law firmSkadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.  In August 2009, it hiredthe restructuring expert Stephen F. Cooper to help lead thecompany.                      About Metro-Goldwyn-MayerMetro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., is an independent, privately heldmotion picture, television, home video, and theatrical productionand Distribution Company.  The Company owns the world’s largestlibrary of modern films, comprising approximately 4,000 titles,and over 10,400 episodes of television programming.  An investorconsortium, comprised of Providence Equity Partners, TPG Capital,Sony Corporation of America, Comcast Corporation, DLJ MerchantBanking Partners and Quadrangle Group, owns MGM.MICHAEL CHANDLER, SR.: Case Summary & Creditors List—————————————————-Debtor: Michael Scott Chandler, Sr.        661 Rosedale Road        Kennett Square, PA 19348Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-19012Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)Judge: Stephen RaslavichDebtor’s Counsel: Eugene A. Steger, Jr., Esq.                  EUGENE STEGER & ASSOCIATES PC                  411 Old Baltimore Pike                  Chadds Ford, PA 19317                  Tel: (6100 388-7737                  E-mail: esteger@stegerlaw.netScheduled Assets: $2,488,524Scheduled Debts: $720,174A list of the Debtor’s seven largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/paeb10-19012.pdfMS GRAND: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors——————————————————-Debtor: MS Grand Inc.        4800 Walden Lane        Lanham, MD 20706Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33911Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       District of Maryland (Greenbelt)Judge: Paul MannesDebtor’s Counsel: Linda D. Regenhardt, Esq.                  BAILEYGARY PC                  8500 Leesburg Pike, Suite 7000                  Vienna, VA 22182                  Tel: (703) 848-2828                  Fax: (703) 893-9276                  E-mail: lregenhardt@garyreg.comScheduled Assets: $6,902,283Scheduled Debts: $8,510,034A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/mdb10-33911.pdfThe petition was signed by Min Sik Kang, president.Debtor-affiliate that filed separate Chapter 11 petition:                                                 Petition   Debtor                              Case No.     Date   ——                              ——–     —-Wesleyan Kim                           08-13577   02/04/09NCD DEVELOPMENT: Files List of 10 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-NCD Development, Inc., has filed with U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Northern District of Texas its list of 10 largest unsecuredcreditors, disclosing:  Entity                       Nature of Claim        Claim Amount  ——                       —————        ————UCA, Inc.3207 Skylane Drive, Suite 110  Trade debt for leaseCarrollton, TX 75006           of storage containers                               that were not provided     $56,000ERWS                           Trade debt incurred11016 South Pipeline Road      in construction of aEuless, TX 76040               retaining wall             $13,600Hedgewood Group                Trade debt incurred16990 Dallas Pkwy, Suite 215   for property taxDallas, TX 75248               consulting services         $9,592H&E Equipment Services         Trade debt incurred                               by former general                               contractor for alleged                               equipment rental            $8,900Royal Signs & Graphics         Trade debt associated                               with manufacture and                               installation of signage     $8,500Shelter Distribution           Trade debt incurred with                               purchase of roofing                               supplies                    $5,181Paetec / McLeod USA Telecom    Trade debt for alleged                               services that were never                               activated/provided          $3,000Settle & Pou                   Trade debt – legal                               services                    $1,824Allied Wastes Services         Trade debt provided                               for dumpster and waste                               hauling                       $370United Site Services, Inc.     Trade debt in                               providing portable                               toilets                       $300Fort Worth, Texas-based NCD Development, Inc., filed for Chapter11 bankruptcy protection on October 3, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. CaseNo. 10-46416).  Randy Ford Taub, Esq., at the Law Office of R.Ford Taub, assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.  TheDebtor estimated its assets at $1 million to $100 million anddebts at $1 million to $10 million.NCD DEVELOPMENT: Files Schedules of Assets & Liabilities——————————————————–NCD Development, Inc., has filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the Northern District of Texas its schedules of assets andliabilities, disclosing:  Name of Schedule                        Assets       Liabilities  —————-                        ——       ———–A. Real Property                        $2,639,734B. Personal Property                      $107,068C. Property Claimed as   ExemptD. Creditors Holding   Secured Claims                                       $4,287,072E. Creditors Holding   Unsecured Priority   Claims                                                  $50,878F. Creditors Holding   Unsecured Non-priority   Claims                                                 $107,267                                        ———–    ———–      TOTAL                              $2,746,802     $4,445,217A copy of the schedules is available for free at:             http://bankrupt.com/misc/NCD_DEVT_sal.pdfFort Worth, Texas-based NCD Development, Inc., filed for Chapter11 bankruptcy protection on October 3, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. CaseNo. 10-46416).  Randy Ford Taub, Esq., at the Law Office of R.Ford Taub, assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.  TheDebtor estimated its assets at $1 million to $100 million anddebts at $1 million to $10 million.NCD DEVELOPMENT: Section 341(a) Meeting Scheduled for Nov. 12————————————————————-The U.S. Trustee for Region 6 will convene a meeting of NCDDevelopment, Inc.’s creditors on November 12, 2010, at 1:30 p.m.The meeting will be held at the Fritz G. Lanham Federal Building,819 Taylor Street, Room 7A24, Fort Worth, Texas 76102.This is the first meeting of creditors required under Section341(a) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in all bankruptcy cases.All creditors are invited, but not required, to attend.  ThisMeeting of Creditors offers the one opportunity in a bankruptcyproceeding for creditors to question a responsible office of theDebtor under oath about the company’s financial affairs andoperations that would be of interest to the general body ofcreditors.Fort Worth, Texas-based NCD Development, Inc., filed for Chapter11 bankruptcy protection on October 3, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. CaseNo. 10-46416).  Randy Ford Taub, Esq., at the Law Office of R.Ford Taub, assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.  TheDebtor estimated its assets at $1 million to $100 million anddebts at $1 million to $10 million.NCD DEVELOPMENT: Taps Randy Ford Taub as General Bankr. Counsel—————————————————————NCD Development, Inc., asks for authorization from the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas to employRandy Ford Taub as general bankruptcy counsel.Mr. Taub will, among other things:     (a) evaluate of the Debtor’s financial condition and furnish         legal advice to the Debtor with regard to its duties,         responsibilities, legal obligations and powers as a         debtor-in-possession and the continued operation of the         Debtor’s business and management of its property;     (b) assist the Debtor in the preparation and filing of the         schedules, statement of financial affairs and other         supporting documents required by the U.S. Bankruptcy         Code;     (c) attend the initial interview conducted by the Office of         the U.S. Trustee and furnish said office with all         requested information about the Debtor’s business and         financial affairs; and     (d) attend the first meeting of creditors with an authorized         representative of the Debtor.Mr. Taub will be paid $300 per hour for his services.Mr. Taub assures the Court that he is a « disinterested person » asthat term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Fort Worth, Texas-based NCD Development, Inc., filed for Chapter11 bankruptcy protection on October 3, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. TexasCase No. 10-46416).  The Debtor estimated its assets at $1 millionto $100 million and debts at $1 million to $10 million.NICHOLASVILLE GREENS: Case Summary & 15 Largest Unsec Creditors—————————————————————Debtor: Nicholasville Greens, LP        340 Royal Poinciana Way, Suite 305        Palm Beach, FL 33480Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-53298Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of Kentucky (Lexington)Debtor’s Counsel: Ellen Arvin Kennedy, Esq.                  DINSMORE & SHOHL                  250 West Main Street, Suite 1400                  Lexington, KY 40507                  Tel: (859) 425-1020                  E-mail: dsbankruptcy@dinslaw.comEstimated Assets: $500,001 to $1,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 15 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/kyeb10-53298.pdfThe petition was signed by Cristie George, senior vice presidentof sole member of the Debtor’s general partner.NORTEL NETWORKS: Court Approves $65 Mil. Sale of Switch Business—————————————————————-Nortel Networks Inc. and its debtor affiliates obtainedpermission from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District ofDelaware and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to sell theirglobal Multi Service Switch businesses to Telefonaktiebolaget LMEricsson for $65 million.The Court approval came barely a week after Nortel conducted abankruptcy auction for its MSS Business where Ericsson emerged asthe winning bidder.  The Sweden-based company beat out anotherrival bidder, PSP Holding LLC, whose US$60 million offer wasselected as the alternate bid.PSP Holding’s US$39 million initial offer served as the « stalkinghorse bid  » or the lead bid at the auction.Ericsson topped PSP Holding’s increased bid at the auction by$5 million.  Accordingly, Ericsson will acquire substantially allassets of the MSS Business globally, including the Data PacketNetwork (DPN) and Services Edge Router (Shasta) product groups.It will also take over contracts related to the MSS Business.Ericsson has agreed to offer employment to Nortel workersaffected by the sale of the MSS Business, including those who arebased outside of the United States.The Nortel/Ericsson deal on the MSS Business sale has beenformalized in a 136-page agreement, a copy of which is availablefor free at http://bankrupt.com/misc/Nortel_MSSSaleEricsson.pdfEricsson said it acquired Nortel’s switch unit on a debt-freebasis in the bankruptcy auction.  SEB Enskilda advised theSwedish company as it sought to buy the unit, according to areport by Bloomberg News.Ericsson has bought Nortel assets at least four times in a littlemore than a year as it expanded both its mobile networks and itsNorth American operations.  It beat bids from Nokia SiemensNetworks and MatlinPatterson Global Advisers LLC to acquireNortel’s wireless equipment unit for $1.13 billion in July 2009,Bloomberg News noted.John Luszczek, general manager of the Nortel MSS Business, saidthe recent asset acquisition is « another proof-point of Nortel’songoing commitment to preserve innovation and customerrelationships. »"Our focus now is to work closely with Ericsson to ensure asseamless a transition as possible for our customers.  At the sametime, we will continue to deliver the superior service that ourcustomers have come to expect from Nortel, » Mr. Luszczek said ina public statement.In its 54th monitor report filed with the Canadian Court, Ernst &Young Inc. expressed support for the sale of the Nortel MSSBusiness, saying the offer from Ericsson « constitutes fairconsideration » for the assets.Ernst & Young is the firm appointed by the Canadian Court tomonitor the assets of Canada-based Nortel Networks Corp. andcertain of its affiliates who have filed for protection underCanada’s Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.Prior to the auction, OSS Nokalva Inc. and several other firmsfiled objections to the Bankruptcy Court to block the proposedassumption of their contracts in connection with the MSS Businesssale, among other things.To address those objections, the Bankruptcy Court clarified thatno provision in its sale order authorizes the assumption orassignment of Nortel’s contracts with OSS Nokalva Inc., AT&TServices Inc., Motorola Inc., Qwest Communications Company LLC,SNMP Research International Inc. and Verizon CommunicationsInc.’s affiliates.  All other objections that have not beenwithdrawn, waived or settled were overruled.Meanwhile, Grapevine-Colleyville, SAP America Inc. and SAP CanadaInc. dropped their objections to the sale.In a related development, NNI withdrew a September 8, 2010 noticeto assign certain customer contracts to the winning bidder.  Theproposed assignment of the contracts was supposed to beconsidered for approval at a September 30 hearing.                      About Nortel NetworksNortel Networks (OTC BB: NRTLQ) — http://www.nortel.com/– delivers communications capabilities that make the promise ofBusiness Made Simple a reality for the Company’s customers.  TheCompany’s next-generation technologies, for both service providerand enterprise networks, support multimedia and business-criticalapplications.  Nortel’s technologies are designed to helpeliminate the barriers to efficiency, speed and performance bysimplifying networks and connecting people to the information theyneed, when they need it.Nortel Networks Corp., Nortel Networks Inc., and other affiliatedcorporations in Canada sought insolvency protection under theCompanies’ Creditors Arrangement Act in the Ontario Superior Courtof Justice (Commercial List).  Ernst & Young was appointed toserve as monitor and foreign representative of the Canadian NortelGroup.The Monitor sought recognition of the CCAA Proceedings in the U.S.by filing a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 15 of the U.S.Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10164).  Mary Caloway,Esq., and Peter James Duhig, Esq., at Buchanan Ingersoll & RooneyPC, in Wilmington, Delaware, serves as the Chapter 15 petitioner’scounsel.Nortel Networks Inc. and 14 affiliates filed separate Chapter 11petitions on January 14, 2009 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10138).Judge Kevin Gross presides over the case.  James L. Bromley, Esq.,at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, LLP, in New York, serves asgeneral bankruptcy counsel; Derek C. Abbott, Esq., at MorrisNichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, in Wilmington, serves as Delawarecounsel.  The Chapter 11 Debtors’ other professionals are LazardFreres & Co. LLC as financial advisors; and Epiq BankruptcySolutions LLC as claims and notice agent.Certain of Nortel’s European subsidiaries also made consequentialfilings for creditor protection.  The Nortel Companies related ina press release that Nortel Networks UK Limited and certainsubsidiaries of the Nortel group incorporated in the EMEA regionhave each obtained an administration order from the English HighCourt of Justice under the Insolvency Act 1986.  The applicationswere made by the EMEA Subsidiaries under the provisions of theEuropean Union’s Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346/2000 onInsolvency Proceedings and on the basis that each EMEASubsidiary’s centre of main interests is in England.  Under theterms of the orders, representatives of Ernst & Young LLP havebeen appointed as administrators of each of the EMEA Companies andwill continue to manage the EMEA Companies and operate theirbusinesses under the jurisdiction of the English Court and inaccordance with the applicable provisions of the Insolvency Act.Several entities, particularly, Nortel Government SolutionsIncorporated have material operations and are not part of thebankruptcy proceedings.As of September 30, 2008, Nortel Networks Corp. reportedconsolidated assets of US$11.6 billion and consolidatedliabilities of US$11.8 billion.  The Nortel Companies’ U.S.businesses are primarily conducted through Nortel Networks Inc.,which is the parent of majority of the U.S. Nortel Companies.  Asof September 30, 2008, NNI had assets of about US$9 billion andliabilities of US$3.2 billion, which do not include NNI’sguarantee of some or all of the Nortel Companies’ aboutUS$4.2 billion of unsecured public debt.NORTEL NETWORKS: Proposes Blade Tech. Indemnification Pact———————————————————-Nortel Networks Inc. seeks the Court’s authority for it andcertain of its debtor affiliates that are stockholders in BladeTechnologies Inc. to enter into a certain indemnification anddeferred payment agreement.Blade Technologies provides Ethernet switches and virtualizationand management solutions for enterprise data centers.  Itsbusiness originated with the launch of Nortel’s Blade ServerSwitches Business Unit in 2003.  NNI and certain debtoraffiliates are minority stockholders in Blade Technologies,owning up to 15.6% equity stake in the firm.The Indemnification Agreement was hammered out as a condition toan entry into a merger agreement between Blade Technologies andInternational Business Machines Corp., by which IBM will acquireBlade Technologies, including Nortel’s stake in Blade.Ann Cordo, Esq., at Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, inWilmington, Delaware, says the consideration provided in theMerger Agreement represents the highest and best offer availablefor the Nortel shares.  She points out that further marketing ofthe Nortel shares would not yield a better offer.  Furthermarketing of the shares, she contends, may even result in areduction in the purchase price or the loss of the deal with IBMaltogether.Nortel relates that it began efforts to market its shares inBlade Technologies in May 2010.  None of the prospective buyers,however, submitted any bids approaching the price offered by IBM,according to Ms. Cordo.The Indemnification Agreement requires stockholders of BladeTechnologies to indemnify and hold harmless IBM or its affiliatesagainst losses in connection with any breach of representation,warranties or covenants in the Indemnification Agreement and inthe Merger Agreement.The Indemnification Agreement also provides that Nortel will haveno liability on or after December 31, 2011, other than withrespect to the so-called « aggregate deferred payment amount » orthe portion of the merger consideration otherwise payable to thesecurity holders and retained by IBM.IBM’s sole and exclusive monetary remedy from Nortel under theIndemnification Agreement is the retention of amounts from thepro rata portion of the aggregate deferred payment amount, whichis retained by IBM pursuant to the Merger Agreement.In connection with their entry into the IndemnificationAgreement, NNI and its affiliated debtors also seek Courtpermission to deliver consents dated September 23, 2010, relatedto the IBM-Blade Technologies merger.The Debtors also seek the Court’s permission to file under sealcopies of the Indemnification Agreement and the Merger Agreement,which reportedly contain « substantial sensitive commercialinformation. »The Court will consider approval of the request at the hearingscheduled for October 14, 2010.  Deadline for filing objectionsis October 7, 2010.                      About Nortel NetworksNortel Networks (OTC BB: NRTLQ) — http://www.nortel.com/– delivers communications capabilities that make the promise ofBusiness Made Simple a reality for the Company’s customers.  TheCompany’s next-generation technologies, for both service providerand enterprise networks, support multimedia and business-criticalapplications.  Nortel’s technologies are designed to helpeliminate the barriers to efficiency, speed and performance bysimplifying networks and connecting people to the information theyneed, when they need it.Nortel Networks Corp., Nortel Networks Inc., and other affiliatedcorporations in Canada sought insolvency protection under theCompanies’ Creditors Arrangement Act in the Ontario Superior Courtof Justice (Commercial List).  Ernst & Young was appointed toserve as monitor and foreign representative of the Canadian NortelGroup.The Monitor sought recognition of the CCAA Proceedings in the U.S.by filing a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 15 of the U.S.Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10164).  Mary Caloway,Esq., and Peter James Duhig, Esq., at Buchanan Ingersoll & RooneyPC, in Wilmington, Delaware, serves as the Chapter 15 petitioner’scounsel.Nortel Networks Inc. and 14 affiliates filed separate Chapter 11petitions on January 14, 2009 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10138).Judge Kevin Gross presides over the case.  James L. Bromley, Esq.,at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, LLP, in New York, serves asgeneral bankruptcy counsel; Derek C. Abbott, Esq., at MorrisNichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, in Wilmington, serves as Delawarecounsel.  The Chapter 11 Debtors’ other professionals are LazardFreres & Co. LLC as financial advisors; and Epiq BankruptcySolutions LLC as claims and notice agent.Certain of Nortel’s European subsidiaries also made consequentialfilings for creditor protection.  The Nortel Companies related ina press release that Nortel Networks UK Limited and certainsubsidiaries of the Nortel group incorporated in the EMEA regionhave each obtained an administration order from the English HighCourt of Justice under the Insolvency Act 1986.  The applicationswere made by the EMEA Subsidiaries under the provisions of theEuropean Union’s Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346/2000 onInsolvency Proceedings and on the basis that each EMEASubsidiary’s centre of main interests is in England.  Under theterms of the orders, representatives of Ernst & Young LLP havebeen appointed as administrators of each of the EMEA Companies andwill continue to manage the EMEA Companies and operate theirbusinesses under the jurisdiction of the English Court and inaccordance with the applicable provisions of the Insolvency Act.Several entities, particularly, Nortel Government SolutionsIncorporated have material operations and are not part of thebankruptcy proceedings.As of September 30, 2008, Nortel Networks Corp. reportedconsolidated assets of US$11.6 billion and consolidatedliabilities of US$11.8 billion.  The Nortel Companies’ U.S.businesses are primarily conducted through Nortel Networks Inc.,which is the parent of majority of the U.S. Nortel Companies.  Asof September 30, 2008, NNI had assets of about US$9 billion andliabilities of US$3.2 billion, which do not include NNI’sguarantee of some or all of the Nortel Companies’ aboutUS$4.2 billion of unsecured public debt.NORTEL NETWORKS: Resolves Price Adjustment Dispute With Avaya————————————————————-Nortel Networks Inc. and its affiliates inked a stipulation withAvaya Inc. for the release of funds held in escrow by Wells FargoBank N.A.Wells Fargo administers the escrow account where the proceedsfrom the sale of Nortel’s Enterprise Solutions business are held.A portion of the funds held in escrow relates to post-closingpurchase price adjustments that could be made pursuant to thesale agreement between Nortel and Avaya.  Funds may be releasedfrom the escrow either by a joint instruction from Nortel andAvaya, or by a final court order.A dispute earlier ensued between Nortel and Avaya after thelatter questioned Nortel’s calculation of post-closing purchaseprice adjustments.  Nortel formally filed a motion with theBankruptcy Court to compel Avaya to comply with the terms of thesale agreement with respect to the Nortel Enterprise SolutionsBusiness.The parties’ Stipulation, as approved by the Court, requiresWells Fargo to release a sum of $6 million from the purchaseprice adjustment escrow funds to Avaya, and to release thebalance of those funds to Nortel’s distribution agent.The Stipulation further requires Avaya to deliver writtenconfirmation to Christopher Ricaurte, president of NortelBusiness Services, of the transfer of certain inventory toNortel.  To the extent any inventory is retained by Avaya and isnot transferred, the value of that inventory will be deductedfrom the amount due to Avaya.Payments made pursuant to the Stipulation will constitute a fulland final satisfaction of all claims for purchase priceadjustments related to the sale of the Enterprise SolutionsBusiness.  Upon entry into the Stipulation, Avaya and Nortel arebarred from seeking further purchase price adjustments.  TheStipulation also calls for the withdrawal of the Motion toEnforce filed by Nortel.A full-text copy of the Nortel/Avaya Stipulation is availablewithout charge at:      http://bankrupt.com/misc/Nortel_StipAvayaPPA.pdf                      About Nortel NetworksNortel Networks (OTC BB: NRTLQ) — http://www.nortel.com/– delivers communications capabilities that make the promise ofBusiness Made Simple a reality for the Company’s customers.  TheCompany’s next-generation technologies, for both service providerand enterprise networks, support multimedia and business-criticalapplications.  Nortel’s technologies are designed to helpeliminate the barriers to efficiency, speed and performance bysimplifying networks and connecting people to the information theyneed, when they need it.Nortel Networks Corp., Nortel Networks Inc., and other affiliatedcorporations in Canada sought insolvency protection under theCompanies’ Creditors Arrangement Act in the Ontario Superior Courtof Justice (Commercial List).  Ernst & Young was appointed toserve as monitor and foreign representative of the Canadian NortelGroup.The Monitor sought recognition of the CCAA Proceedings in the U.S.by filing a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 15 of the U.S.Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10164).  Mary Caloway,Esq., and Peter James Duhig, Esq., at Buchanan Ingersoll & RooneyPC, in Wilmington, Delaware, serves as the Chapter 15 petitioner’scounsel.Nortel Networks Inc. and 14 affiliates filed separate Chapter 11petitions on January 14, 2009 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10138).Judge Kevin Gross presides over the case.  James L. Bromley, Esq.,at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, LLP, in New York, serves asgeneral bankruptcy counsel; Derek C. Abbott, Esq., at MorrisNichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, in Wilmington, serves as Delawarecounsel.  The Chapter 11 Debtors’ other professionals are LazardFreres & Co. LLC as financial advisors; and Epiq BankruptcySolutions LLC as claims and notice agent.Certain of Nortel’s European subsidiaries also made consequentialfilings for creditor protection.  The Nortel Companies related ina press release that Nortel Networks UK Limited and certainsubsidiaries of the Nortel group incorporated in the EMEA regionhave each obtained an administration order from the English HighCourt of Justice under the Insolvency Act 1986.  The applicationswere made by the EMEA Subsidiaries under the provisions of theEuropean Union’s Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346/2000 onInsolvency Proceedings and on the basis that each EMEASubsidiary’s centre of main interests is in England.  Under theterms of the orders, representatives of Ernst & Young LLP havebeen appointed as administrators of each of the EMEA Companies andwill continue to manage the EMEA Companies and operate theirbusinesses under the jurisdiction of the English Court and inaccordance with the applicable provisions of the Insolvency Act.Several entities, particularly, Nortel Government SolutionsIncorporated have material operations and are not part of thebankruptcy proceedings.As of September 30, 2008, Nortel Networks Corp. reportedconsolidated assets of US$11.6 billion and consolidatedliabilities of US$11.8 billion.  The Nortel Companies’ U.S.businesses are primarily conducted through Nortel Networks Inc.,which is the parent of majority of the U.S. Nortel Companies.  Asof September 30, 2008, NNI had assets of about US$9 billion andliabilities of US$3.2 billion, which do not include NNI’sguarantee of some or all of the Nortel Companies’ aboutUS$4.2 billion of unsecured public debt.NORTEL NETWORKS: Sets Cross-Border Claims Settlement Rules———————————————————-Nortel Networks Inc. and its affiliated debtors sought andobtained Bankruptcy Court approval of a cross-border protocol forthe settlement of claims asserted against them.The Cross-Border Claims Settlement Protocol aims to facilitatecoordination among U.S.-based Nortel companies and theiraffiliates in Canada for the resolution of claims that were filedin Nortel’s Chapter 11 cases and insolvency cases.Among the claims to be settled under the Cross-Border ClaimsSettlement Protocol are so-called « overlapping claims » that werefiled in both U.S. and Canadian proceedings by the same creditoror its affiliate, which stemmed from the same debt, property,agreement or transaction.  The Cross-Border Claims SettlementProtocol also governs the resolution of non-overlapping claimsthat were filed in both the U.S. and Canadian proceedings by thesame creditor or its affiliate.Moreover, the Cross-Border Claims Settlement Protocol calls forthe sharing of information about the claims among the Nortelcompanies and Ernst & Young Inc., and the conduct of a monthlymeeting for such purpose.The Nortel companies, Ernst & Young, the Official Committee ofUnsecured Creditors and the ad hoc group of bondholders areafforded the right to support or object and to be heard in boththe U.S. Bankruptcy Court and the Ontario Superior Court ofJustice with respect to their claims under the Cross-BorderClaims Settlement Protocol.A full-text copy of the document detailing the Cross-BorderClaims Settlement Protocol is available without charge at:    http://bankrupt.com/misc/Nortel_CrossBorderProtocol.pdfThe Canadian Court, which oversees the insolvency cases of NortelNetworks Corp. and its Canadian affiliates, also handed down anorder approving the proposed protocol following a motion filedfrom NNI’s Canadian affiliates and a recommendation from Ernst &Young.NNI also obtained the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of anagreement, which authorizes it to share with the CreditorsCommittee and the bondholders group information about certainclaims it received from the Canadian affiliates or from Ernst &Young.  A full-text copy of the Sharing Agreement is availablewithout charge at:    http://bankrupt.com/misc/Nortel_SideLettersInfoSharing.pdf                      About Nortel NetworksNortel Networks (OTC BB: NRTLQ) — http://www.nortel.com/– delivers communications capabilities that make the promise ofBusiness Made Simple a reality for the Company’s customers.  TheCompany’s next-generation technologies, for both service providerand enterprise networks, support multimedia and business-criticalapplications.  Nortel’s technologies are designed to helpeliminate the barriers to efficiency, speed and performance bysimplifying networks and connecting people to the information theyneed, when they need it.Nortel Networks Corp., Nortel Networks Inc., and other affiliatedcorporations in Canada sought insolvency protection under theCompanies’ Creditors Arrangement Act in the Ontario Superior Courtof Justice (Commercial List).  Ernst & Young was appointed toserve as monitor and foreign representative of the Canadian NortelGroup.The Monitor sought recognition of the CCAA Proceedings in the U.S.by filing a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 15 of the U.S.Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10164).  Mary Caloway,Esq., and Peter James Duhig, Esq., at Buchanan Ingersoll & RooneyPC, in Wilmington, Delaware, serves as the Chapter 15 petitioner’scounsel.Nortel Networks Inc. and 14 affiliates filed separate Chapter 11petitions on January 14, 2009 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 09-10138).Judge Kevin Gross presides over the case.  James L. Bromley, Esq.,at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, LLP, in New York, serves asgeneral bankruptcy counsel; Derek C. Abbott, Esq., at MorrisNichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, in Wilmington, serves as Delawarecounsel.  The Chapter 11 Debtors’ other professionals are LazardFreres & Co. LLC as financial advisors; and Epiq BankruptcySolutions LLC as claims and notice agent.Certain of Nortel’s European subsidiaries also made consequentialfilings for creditor protection.  The Nortel Companies related ina press release that Nortel Networks UK Limited and certainsubsidiaries of the Nortel group incorporated in the EMEA regionhave each obtained an administration order from the English HighCourt of Justice under the Insolvency Act 1986.  The applicationswere made by the EMEA Subsidiaries under the provisions of theEuropean Union’s Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346/2000 onInsolvency Proceedings and on the basis that each EMEASubsidiary’s centre of main interests is in England.  Under theterms of the orders, representatives of Ernst & Young LLP havebeen appointed as administrators of each of the EMEA Companies andwill continue to manage the EMEA Companies and operate theirbusinesses under the jurisdiction of the English Court and inaccordance with the applicable provisions of the Insolvency Act.Several entities, particularly, Nortel Government SolutionsIncorporated have material operations and are not part of thebankruptcy proceedings.As of September 30, 2008, Nortel Networks Corp. reportedconsolidated assets of US$11.6 billion and consolidatedliabilities of US$11.8 billion.  The Nortel Companies’ U.S.businesses are primarily conducted through Nortel Networks Inc.,which is the parent of majority of the U.S. Nortel Companies.  Asof September 30, 2008, NNI had assets of about US$9 billion andliabilities of US$3.2 billion, which do not include NNI’sguarantee of some or all of the Nortel Companies’ aboutUS$4.2 billion of unsecured public debt.NORTH AMERICAN PETROLEUM: Nov. 22 Deadline for Proofs of Claim————————————————————–The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware directscreditors to file their proofs of claim on account of claimsarising prior to May 25, 2010, by 5:00 p.m., prevailing EasternTime, on Nov. 22, 2010.  This general claims bar date includesclaims arising under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 503(b)(9).  Government unitshave until Nov. 22, 2010, to file their proofs of claim.  Claimforms and detailed information about claims process is availableat http://dm.epiq11.com/NAPCUS           About North American Petroleum Corp. USADenver, Colorado-based North American Petroleum Corp. USA is anatural gas driller.  North American Petroleum and Prize Petroleumare subsidiaries of Petroflow Energy Corporation.North American Petroleum sought Chapter 11 protection on May 25,2010 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 10-11707).  David R. Seligman, Esq.,and Ryan Blaine Bennett, Esq., at Kirkland & Ellis LLP in Chicagoserve as lead bankruptcy counsel.  Domenic E. Pacitti, Esq., andMargaret M. Manning, Esq., at Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLPin Wilmington, Del., serve as the Debtor’s local counsel.  KineticAdvisors LLC is the Company’s  restructuring advisor.  EpiqBankruptcy Solutions, LLC, is the Debtor’s notice, claims andballoting agent.  The Debtor disclosed $140,678,983 in assets and$125,595,183 in liabilities as of the Petition Date.The Debtor’s affiliate, Prize Petroleum LLC, filed a separateChapter 11 petition on May 25, 2010 (Case No. 10-11708).  PrizePetroleum scheduled $121,945,092 in liabilities.NORTHFIELD INVESTMENTS: Case Summary & Creditors List—————————————————–Debtor: Northfield Investments, Inc.          fka Regional Property Development Corp              Property Asset Development Corp              North Regional I LLC              North Regional II LLC        601 Eagleton Downs Drive        Pineville, NC 28134Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33044Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Western District of North Carolina (Charlotte)Judge: George R. HodgesDebtor’s Counsel: Richard M. Mitchell, Esq.                  MITCHELL & CULP, PLLC                  1001 Morehead Square Drive, Suite 330                  Charlotte, NC 28203                  Tel: (704) 333-0630                  Fax: (704) 333-4975                  E-mail: rmmatty@mitchellculp.comScheduled Assets: $10,801,094Scheduled Debts: $13,071,273The petition was signed by Lawrence J. Shaheen, Sr., president.Debtor’s List of 16 Largest Unsecured Creditors:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————Wagner, Noble and Company, Inc.    Accounting             $109,3015970 Fairview Road, Suite 402Charlotte, NC 28210Bland & Richter, LLC               Attorneys              $103,792P.O. Box 72Columbia, SC 29202Bishop, Capitano & Abner, PA       –                      $19,4974521 Sharon Road, Suite 350Charlotte, NC 28211Bank of America                    –                      $13,400Cranford, Schultze, Tomchin        Attorney                 $6,961Wells Daisley Rabon, PA            Attorney                 $5,945GMAC                               Trade                    $4,607NC Dept. of Revenue                Taxes                    $3,258Southscape Landscaping             Trade                    $2,981Humphrey & Partners Architects     Architects               $1,500Grier, Furr & Crisp                Attorneys                $1,375Wishart, Norris, Henninger &       Attorneys                $1,193PittmanAutomatic Sprinkler Inspections    Trade                    $1,100SC Dept. Revenue                   Taxes                      $555Allied Waste                       Trade                      $390Templeton & Raynor, PA             Attorneys                  $272NOVELOS THERAPEUTIC: Stockholders OKs 200% Increase in Shares————————————————————-Novelos Therapeutic Inc. held on Oct. 18, 2010, a special meetingof stockholders.  At the meeting, the Company’s stockholdersapproved an amendment to the certificate of incorporation toincrease the total number of authorized shares of the Company’scommon stock from 225 million shares to 750 million shares.The Company said of 111,931,182 shares of common stock outstandingand entitled to vote at the special meeting, 67,279,781 shareswere voted in favor of the proposal and 8,617,627 shares werevoted against the proposal, 30,293 shares abstained and there wereno broker non-votes.   »All 408.264045 shares of our Series Econvertible preferred stock outstanding and entitled to vote atthe special meeting were voted in favor of the proposal, » theCompany notes.The Company related that 83,300,087 shares of common stock andshares of Series E convertible preferred stock, voting on an as-converted basis, were voted together, as a single class, in favorof the proposal; 8,612,627 shares were voted against the proposal;30,293 shares abstained; and there were no broker non-votes.Following the conclusion of the meeting an amendment to ourcertificate of incorporation effecting the increase in authorizedcommon stock was filed with the Delaware Secretary of State.Newton, Mass.-based Novelos Therapeutics, Inc. (OTC BB: NVLT)– http://www.novelos.com/– is a biopharmaceutical company developing oxidized glutathione-based compounds for the treatmentof cancer and hepatitis.The Company’s balance sheet as of June 30, 2010, showed$3.5 million in total assets, $5.8 million in total liabilities,$13.8 million in redeemable preferred stock, and a stockholders’deficit of $16.1 million.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 8, 2010,Stowe & Degon LLC, in Westborough, Mass., expressed substantialdoubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern,following its 2009 results.  The independent auditors noted of theCompany’s continuing losses and stockholders’ deficiency atDecember 31, 2009.NUTRACEA INC: Appoints FTI Consulting as Plan Agent—————————————————According to documents filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, andpursuant to Article V(6) of the First Amended Plan ofReorganization proposed by NutraCea and its official unsecuredcreditors’ committee, the Company and its committee designatedChas E. Harvick of FTI Consulting to serve as Plan agent,BankruptcyData.com reports.As Agent, Mr. Harvick will have the powers and duties set forth inArticle V(6) of the Plan: He will be authorized to utilize theservices of his subordinates at FTI Consulting in discharging hisduties, and he and his subordinates will be compensated by theCompany at their standard hourly rates and will be reimbursed forreasonable out-of-pocket expenses.  Mr. Harvick’s current hourlyrate is $540.                          About NutraCeaPhoenix, Arizona-based NutraCea is a world leader in productionand utilization of stabilized rice bran.  NutraCea holds manypatents for stabilized rice bran production technology andproprietary products derived from SRB.  NutraCea’s proprietarytechnology enables the creation of food and nutrition products tobe unlocked from rice bran, normally a waste by-product ofstandard rice processing.Nutracea filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection November 10,2009 (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 09-28817).  S. Cary Forrester,Esq., at Forrester & Worth, PLLC, assists the Company in itsrestructuring effort.  The Company estimated assets of $50 millionto $100 million and debts of $10 million to $50 million in itsChapter 11 petition.OAK KNOLL: Case Summary & 10 Largest Unsecured Creditors——————————————————–Debtor: Oak Knoll Court, LLC          dba The Maguire Company        164 Oak Knoll Avenue        San Anselmo, CA 94960Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-14000Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Northern District of California (Santa Rosa)Judge: Alan JaroslovskyDebtor’s Counsel: Michael C. Fallon, Esq.                  LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL C. FALLON                  100 E. Street, #219                  Santa Rosa, CA 95404                  Tel: (707) 546-6770                  E-mail: mcfallon@fallonlaw.netScheduled Assets: $1,264,290Scheduled Debts: $2,741,660A list of the Company’s 10 largest unsecured creditors filedtogether with the petition is available for free at:The petition was signed by Joseph Maguire, manager.OLLY’S RETAIL: Parent to Launch Kids’ Clothing Line, Web Site————————————————————-Jacqueline Palank, writing for Dow Jones’ Daily Bankruptcy Review,reports that Oilily BV says it’s bounced back from bankruptcy,pointing to the debut of its new kids’ clothing collection and itsplans to launch a retail Web site geared toward U.S. shoppers.DBR also relates the company said it’s now working on a women’sapparel collection, which has yet to debut, and will also developlifestyle products for the first time.In light of the « high demand for Oilily products in the UnitedStates, » the company will launch a retail Web site for U.S.customers next year, Oilily said in a press release, DBR notes.Chicago, Illinois-based Olly’s Retail U.S.A. is a women’s andchildren’s specialty store chain known for its colorful clothingand bright patterns.Parent Oilily underwent insolvency proceedings in the Netherlandsin April 2009.  DBR says the Olsthoorn family — which foundedOilily in 1963 — bought the brand back from the private-equityfirms that owned the company.Olly’s sought Chapter 11 protection (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No.09-13464) on May 28, 2009.  Olly’s estimated assets of $1 millionto $10 million and debts of $10 million to $50 million.At the time of its bankruptcy filing, the U.S. unit said in courtpapers that it operated 25 Oilily retail stores in 16 states.After Oilily whittled its store count down to 17 and launchedgoing-out-of-business sales, the bankruptcy case was dismissedthis year.OMAR SPAHI: Reorganization Case Dismissed at Request of NCB———————————————————–The Hon. Peter H. Carroll of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theCentral District of California dismissed the Chapter 11 case ofOmar Yehia Spahi.NCB, FSB, asked the Court to dismiss, or alternatively, to convertthe case to one under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Santa Monica, California, Omar Yehia Spahi filedfor Chapter 11 on December 4, 2009 (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No.09-44294).  The Law Offices of Michael Jay Berger assisted theDebtor in its restructuring effort.  The Debtor disclosed$25,938,796 in assets and $19,471,263 in liabilities as of thePetition Date.ORANGE GROVE: Has Until December 30 to Propose Reorganization Plan——————————————————————The Hon. Alan M. Ahart of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theCentral District of California extended Orange Grove Service,Inc.’s deadlines for:   – filing a disclosure statement and plan of reorganization      until December 30, 2010;   – the approval of the disclosure statement until February 28;      and   – the confirmation of a plan of reorganization until April 30.At the October 6 hearing, Judge Ahart denied the Debtor’s motionsto extend its exclusivity period, and the deadline for objectingto proofs of claims.                    About Orange Grove ServiceLa Verne, California-based Orange Grove Service, Inc., filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March 25, 2010 (Bankr. C.D.Calif. Case No. 10-21336).  Ori S. Blumenfeld, Esq., at Wilson &Associates LLP, assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.The Company estimated its assets and debts at $10 million to$50 million.PACIFIC AVENUE: Bankruptcy Administrator Forms Creditors Committee——————————————————————Linda W. Simpson, the U.S. Bankruptcy Administrator for theWestern District of North Carolina, appointed six members to theofficial committee of unsecured creditors in the Chapter 11 caseof Pacific Avenue, LLC.The Creditors Committee members are:1. Epic Wings, LLC   Attn: Peter Verhoeven   20 Rum Row   Hilton Head Island, SC 299282. Lockwood Identity Inc. dba SignArt   Attn: Alan Capps   6225 Old Concord Road   Charlotte, NC 282133. Excel Electrical Technologies, Inc.   Attn: Randy Sossamon   7168 Weddington Road, Suite 124   Concord, NC 280274. Cam-Ful Industries, Inc.   Attn: Brian Rosencrance   P.O. Box 279   9800 Industrial Drive   Pineville, NC 281345. Joseph W. Grier, III   Grier, Furr & Crisp, PA   101 N. Tryon Street, Suite 1240   Charlotte, NC 282466. Internal Revenue Service   320 Federal Place, Room 335   Greensboro, NC 27401Official creditors’ committees have the right to employ legal andaccounting professionals and financial advisors, at the Debtor’sexpense.  They may investigate the Debtor’s business and financialaffairs.  Importantly, official committees serve as fiduciaries tothe general population of creditors they represent.  Thosecommittees will also attempt to negotiate the terms of aconsensual Chapter 11 plan — almost always subject to the termsof strict confidentiality agreements with the Debtors and othercore parties-in-interest.  If negotiations break down, theCommittee may ask the Bankruptcy Court to replace management withan independent trustee.  If the Committee concludes reorganizationof the Debtor is impossible, the Committee will urge theBankruptcy Court to convert the Chapter 11 cases to a liquidationproceeding.                         About Pacific AvenuePacific Avenue, LLC, is a North Carolina limited liability companywhose principal place of business is located in Charlotte, NorthCarolina.  Together with Pacific Avenue II, LLC, the Company ownsand operates the EpiCentre, a mixed-use commercial developmentconsisting of approximately 302,000 rentable square feet of officeand retail/entertainment space, plus an underground parking deck,located at 210 E. Trade St. in the city block surrounded by thelight rail line, Fourth Street, College Street, and Trade Streetin uptown Charlotte, North Carolina.Pacific Avenue, LLC, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection onJuly 22, 2010 (Bankr. W.D. N.C. Case No. 10-32093).  Joseph W.Grier, III, Esq., at Grier, Furr & Crisp, P.A., assists theCompany in its restructuring effort.  The Company estimated up to$50,000 in assets and $50 million to $100 million in debts in itsbankruptcy petition.The Company’s affiliate, Pacific Avenue II, filed a separateChapter 11 petition.PACIFIC LUMBER: 5th Cir. Says Scopac Noteholders Have Admin. Claim——————————————————————Holders of notes secured by the timber and non-timber assets ofScotia Pacific Co., LLC, seek review of the district court’sdismissal of their appeal — over compensation for diminution inthe value of collateral during the pendency of a Chapter 11bankruptcy — for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and contendthat the bankruptcy court erred in denying their « superpriority »administrative claim on the bankruptcy estate.  Supporters ofScopac’s reorganization plan argue that the district court lackedjurisdiction due to the Noteholders’ separate appeal of the planconfirmation order, an order affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appealsfor the Fifth Circuit, in large part, in 2009. See In re PacificLumber Co.,584 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2009) (Jones, C.J.).  Theyfurther assert that the bankruptcy court correctly calculated thevalue of the Noteholders’ administrative claim: zero.The three-man panel of Chief Judge Edith H. Jones, Circuit JudgeEdward C. Prado, and District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden of theSouthern District of Mississippi, sitting by designation, rulethat jurisdiction exists and, on the merits, uphold anadministrative priority claim of $29.7 million.Judge Jones, who penned the decision, says the bankruptcy courtundervalued the Noteholders’ priority administrative Sec. 507(b)claim by $29.7 million.  The court erred in not crediting theirinterest with timber sales proceeds that were received during thebankruptcy, on which they had a lien and priority interest arisingfrom the court’s many cash collateral orders.  To deprive theNoteholders of this amount would undermine a fundamentalprotection for secured parties whose collateral is used by thedebtor during its reorganization efforts.  The judgment of thedistrict court is vacated, and the case is remanded withinstructions to enter judgment for the Noteholders for a $29.7million administrative priority claim against the reorganizeddebtor.A copy of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling dated October 19, 2010, isavailable at http://is.gd/g9MXafrom Leagle.com                        About Pacific LumberBased in Oakland, California, The Pacific Lumber Company and itssubsidiaries operated in several principal areas of the forestproducts industry, including the growing and harvesting of redwoodand Douglas-fir timber, the milling of logs into lumber and themanufacture of lumber into a variety of finished products.Scotia Pacific Company LLC, Scotia Development LLC, Britt LumberCo., Inc., Salmon Creek LLC and Scotia Inn Inc. are wholly ownedsubsidiaries of Pacific Lumber.Scotia Pacific, Pacific Lumber’s largest operating subsidiary, wasestablished in 1993, in conjunction with a securitizationtransaction pursuant to which the vast majority of PacificLumber’s timberlands were transferred to Scotia Pacific, andScotia Pacific issued Timber Collateralized Notes secured bysubstantially all of Scotia Pacific’s assets, including thetimberlands.Pacific Lumber, Scotia Pacific, and four other subsidiaries filedfor chapter 11 protection on Jan. 18, 2007 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. CaseNos. 07-20027 through 07-20032). Jack L. Kinzie, Esq., at BakerBotts LLP, is Pacific Lumber’s lead counsel.  Nathaniel PeterHolzer, Esq., Harlin C. Womble, Jr., Esq., and Shelby A. Jordan,Esq., at Jordan Hyden Womble Culbreth & Holzer PC, is PacificLumber’s co-counsel.  Kathryn A. Coleman, Esq., and Eric J.Fromme, Esq., at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, acts as ScotiaPacific’s lead counsel.  Kyung S. Lee, Esq., at Diamond McCarthyLLP, is Scotia Pacific’s co-counsel, replacing Porter & HedgesLLP.  John D. Fiero, Esq., at Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP,represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.When Pacific Lumber filed for protection from its creditors, itestimated assets and debts of more than $100 million.  ScotiaPacific disclosed total assets of $932,000,000 and total debtsof $765,978,335.The Debtors filed their Joint Plan of Reorganization on Sept. 30,2007, which was amended on Dec. 20, 2007.  Four other parties-in-interest have filed competing plans for the Debtors — The Bank ofNew York Trust Company, N.A., as Indenture Trustee for the TimberNotes; the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors; MarathonStructured Finance Fund L.P, the Debtors’ DIP Lender and Agentunder the DIP Credit Facility; and the Heartlands Commission,which represents the tribal members of the Bear River Band ofRohnerville Rancheria and PALCO employees.On July 8, 2008, the Court confirmed the Modified First AmendedJoint Plan of Reorganization With Technical Modifications for theDebtors proposed by Marathon Structured Finance Fund L.P.,Mendocino Redwood Company, LLC, and the Official Committee ofUnsecured Creditors.The Debtors emerged from bankruptcy protection on July 30, 2008.The Reorganized Entities have been renamed as Humboldt RedwoodCo., under the management of Mendocino Redwood.PARK AVENUE BANK: Okla. Regulator Sues Former Exec, Oppenheimer—————————————————————David Benoit, writing for Dow Jones Newswires, reports that theOffice of Insurance Commissioner in Oklahoma on Tuesday sued thechief executive of New York’s Park Avenue Bank and OppenheimerHoldings Inc. over an attempt by the executive to save his then-failing firm by buying an Oklahoma insurance company.  Accordingto the report, the OIC alleges Park Avenue and investment bankOppenheimer knowingly misrepresented the transaction to theregulators in 2008.According to Dow Jones, the suit alleges that Park Avenue andCharles Antonucci, its owner and chief executive, agreed to buythe assets of insurer Providence Holdings Inc. in October 2008 for$37.5 million.  Mr. Antonucci changed the name of the assets toPark Avenue Property & Casualty Insurance Co., which is currentlyin liquidation proceedings in the court.  OIC serves as receiverfor the insurance firm.Dow Jones says the suit alleges Providence and Oppenheimer knew,or should have known, that Mr. Antonucci and his firm couldn’thave financed the purchase and instead were part of a deal thatallowed Mr. Antonucci to use the insurance company’s own assets asthe collateral for a loan from Oppenheimer.Dow Jones says a spokesman for Oppenheimer said the company hasn’treceived the complaint but in an e-mailed statement said the bankbelieved it acted « appropriately at all times and intends tovigorously defend any claims. »"Oppenheimer wants to make clear that Oppenheimer in no wayconspired with Charles Antonucci or any other party in regards toProvidence Property & Casualty Co., » the statement read, accordingto Dow Jones.The suit was filed by Rhodes Hieronymus Jones Tucker & Gable inTulsa, on behalf of the insurance regulator.The Troubled Company Reporter, citing The Associated Press, saidon October 13, 2010, that Mr. Antonucci, 59, entered the plea inU.S. District Court to fraud, bank bribery, embezzlement andconspiracy charges.  As part of the plea, Mr. Antonucci admittedthat he accepted bribes to influence his decisions as presidentand chief executive officer of The Park Avenue Bank.  Mr.Antonucci agreed to pay $11.2 million and forfeit various assetsto the government.  He resigned as the bank’s president in 2009.Park Avenue Bank was a lender with more than $500 million inassets that specialized in commercial-real-estate loans.  The bankfailed in March 2010 after piling up more than $27 million in netlosses last year.  The Wall Street Journal, citing filings thebank made with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., reported thatthe bank’s bad real-estate loans shrank its capital to just$3.3 million at end of 2009, down 87% from two years earlier.The bank’s four branches were taken over by Valley National Bank.Park Avenue Bank of New York isn’t affiliated with Park AvenueBank in Georgia.PEARLAND SUNRISE: City Nat’l Bank Suit Transferred to W.D. Tex.—————————————————————The Hon. Letitia Z. Paul transferred the venue of adversaryproceeding, City National Bank v. Pearland Sunrise Lake Center,L.P., et al., Adv. Proc. No. 10-11927 (Bankr. S.D. Tex.), to theUnited States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas,where PSLC and its affiliated-debtors’ chapter 11 bankruptcy casesare pending.  Judge Paul concludes that the issues of easy,expeditious trial, and of having localized issues decided at homeweigh in favor of transfer.The adversary proceeding relates to a prepetition suit the Debtorsand Park Avenue Townhomes LLC filed in the 23rd Judicial DistrictCourt of Brazoria County, Texas, against an insurance carrier andinsurance agents on claims related to insurance coverage fordamage to their real property from Hurricane Ike.  CNB intervened,asserting an entitlement to the insurance proceeds.  FrischContracting Group, Inc., asserted a materialman’s lien claim.Cross Check Public Adjuster’s Inc. also intervened, asserting aright to a portion of the insurance proceeds based on contractswith the plaintiffs.  Omnibank, N.A. also intervened, asserting anentitlement to the insurance proceeds, on grounds of a deed oftrust. The suit was removed to the Southern District of Texasbankruptcy court.CNB filed a motion to transfer venue of the PSLC Chapter 11 caseto the Southern District of Texas.  That motion was denied.A copy of Judge Paul’s memorandum opinion dated October 19, 2010,is available at http://is.gd/g9JQRfrom Leagle.com Based in Marble Falls, Texas, Southeast Regency Medical Center,LP, Pearland Sunrise Lake Village II, LP, Pearland Sunrise LakeVillage I, LP, and Pearland Sunrise Lake Center, LP, filedvoluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions (Bankr. W.D. Tex. CaseNo. 10-11926) on July 9, 2010.  Pearland Corners II, LP, filed avoluntary Chapter 11 petition on September 3, 2010.  Frank B.Lyon, Esq., in Austin, Texas, assists the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts.  Pearland Sunrise Lake Village I andPearland Sunrise Lake Village II estimated $10 million to$50 million in both assets and debts in their petitions.PENNYRILE SENIOR: Case Summary & 8 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————–Debtor: Pennyrile Senior Apartments, LP        340 Royal Poinciana Way, Ste. 305        Palm Beach, FL 33480Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-53301Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Eastern District of Kentucky (Lexington)Debtor’s Counsel: Ellen Arvin Kennedy, Esq.                  DINSMORE & SHOHL                  250 West Main Street, Suite 1400                  Lexington, KY 40507                  Tel: (859) 425-1020                  E-mail: dsbankruptcy@dinslaw.comEstimated Assets: $500,001 to $1,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s eight largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/kyeb10-53301.pdfThe petition was signed by Cristie George, senior vice presidentof sole member of the Debtor’s general partner.PETROLEUM & FRANCHISE: Hearing on Further Cash Use Set for Oct. 26——————————————————————The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, in afourth preliminary order, authorized Petroleum & Franchise CapitalLLC, et al., to use until October 29, 2010, cash securing theirobligations to their prepetition lenders.A final hearing on the Debtors’ further use of the cash collateralwill be held on October 26 at 10:00 a.m. (ET).As of the Petition Date, Autobahn Funding Company LLC and DZ BankAG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank, Frankfurt AS Main (theLender Parties) allege, among other things, a first prioritysecured claim against all of Debtor PFF’s assets, including PFF’scash and accounts receivable.Pursuant to an August 30, 2007 receivables loan and securityagreement by and among the Debtors and Autobahn Funding Company,LLC (the Lender) and DZ Bank (the Agent), there is outstandingprincipal balance of approximately $54 million under the variousloan agreements with the Lender and the Agent.  In June 2010, theAgent declared a default and triggered increased amortizationunder the various loan documents and ceased future funding of theDebtors.The Debtors will use the cash collateral to fund their Chapter 11case, pay suppliers and other parties.As adequate protection for any diminution in value of the lenders’collateral, the Debtors will grant the prepetition lendersreplacement or substitute liens in all postpetition assets of theDebtors and proceeds thereof, excluding any bankruptcy avoidancecauses of action, and that replacement liens will have the samevalidity, extent, and priority that the Lender Parties possessedas to said liens on the Petition Date.             About Petroleum & Franchise Capital, LLC,Danbury, Connecticut-based Petroleum & Franchise Capital, LLC,filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on June 23, 2010(Bankr. D. Conn. Case No. 10-51465).  Craig I. Lifland, Esq., andJames Berman, Esq., at Zeisler and Zeisler, assists the Company inits restructuring effort.  The Company estimated its assets anddebts at $50 million to $100 million.Petroleum & Franchise Funding, LLC, an affiliate of the Debtor, afiled separate Chapter 11 petition on June 23, 2010 (Case No. 10-51467).  The Company estimated its assets and debts at $50 millionto $100 million.POTOMAC ENVIRONMENTAL: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsec Creditors—————————————————————-Debtor: Potomac Environmental Technology, Inc.          dba PEPTEC        11684 Cedarline Court        Ellicott City, MD 21042-1514Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33825Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       District of Maryland (Baltimore)Judge: Robert A. GordonDebtor’s Counsel: Christopher Hamlin, Esq.                  6411 Ivy Lane, Suite 200                  Greenbelt, MD 20770                  Tel: (301) 441-2420                  E-mail: chamlin@mhlawyers.comEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/mdb10-33825.pdfThe petition was signed by Wais Jalali, president.PREFERRED PROPERTIES: Reorganization Case Converted to Chapter 7—————————————————————-The Hon. Michael S. McManus of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theEastern District of California converted the Chapter 11 case ofPreferred Properties, LLC, to one under Chapter 7 of theBankruptcy Code.The Acting U.S. Trustee for Region 17 asked the Court to dismiss,or, in the alternative, convert the case to Chapter 7.Sutter Creek, California-based Preferred Properties, LLC, filedfor Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March 25, 2010 (Bankr.E.D. Calif. Case No. 10-27515).  David Foyil, Esq., who has anoffice in Sutter Creek, California, assisted the Debtor in itsrestructuring effort.  The Debtor disclosed $15,466,797 in assetsand $7,344,481 in liabilities.PRIUM LAKEWOOD: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: Prium Lakewood Buildings LLC        820 A. Street, #300        Tacoma, WA 98402Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-48621Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Western District of Washington (Tacoma)Judge: Paul B. SnyderDebtor’s Counsel: Timothy W. Dore, Esq.                  RYAN SWANSON & CLEVELAND PLLC                  1201 3rd Avenue, Suite 3400                  Seattle, WA 98101-3034                  Tel: (206) 464-4224                  E-mail: dore@ryanlaw.comEstimated Assets: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000Estimated Debts: $10,000,001 to $50,000,000The petition was signed by Thomas W. Price, member of PriumCompanies, LLC, sole member of debtor.Debtor-affiliates filing separate Chapter 11 petition:        Entity                        Case No.       Petition Date        ——                        ——–       ————-Chelsea Heights LLC                   10-44959            06/18/10Prium Kent Retail LLC                 10-45715            07/14/10Prium Meeker Mall LLC                 10-45713            07/14/10Prium Tumwater Buildings LLC          10-44962            06/18/10Debtor’s List of 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————New Dimension Landscape            –                      $13,7408504 Canyon Road EPuyallup, WA 98371First Western Properties           –                      $11,1616402 Tacoma Mall BoulevardTacoma, WA 98409Cain’s Pressure Washing            –                       $8,525P.O. Box 1270Maple Valley, WA 980380Pierce County Security             –                       $6,300Smith Fire Systems                 –                       $5,812Silvaire Lighting                  –                       $3,070ABM Janitorial Service             –                       $2,978McKinstry                          –                       $2,974Pierce County Sewer                –                       $1,444Lakewood Refuse Service            –                       $1,405Whirlwind Services LLC             –                       $1,255CB Richard Ellis                   –                       $1,200Best Parking Lot Cleaning          –                         $492Washington Alarm Inc.              –                         $407Sprague                            –                         $399Alarm Center – Ace Fire            –                         $102Lakewood Water District            –                          $72Boone Electric-Custom              –                          $70Anthae360                          –                          $40Reprographics Northwest            –                          $19PT-1 COMMUNICATIONS: Claim Order Not « Entered Without a Contest »—————————————————————-WestLaw reports that a bankruptcy court’s claim order reducing thecreditor’s claim was not « entered without a contest, » within themeaning of F.R.B.P. 9024, and so any relief sought by the creditorunder the rule governing motions for relief from judgment or orderwas required to have been sought within a year of entry of theclaim order.  The debtor had objected to the creditor’s originalclaim, thereby creating a disputed matter which, althoughthereafter resolved, could not be held to have been enteredwithout a contest.  Universal Service Admin. Co. v. PT-1Communications, Inc., — B.R. —-, 2010 WL 3861016 (E.D.N.Y.)(Ross., J.).This ruling affirms In re PT-1 Communications, Inc., 412 B.R. 85,2009 WL 2762631 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y.) (Craig, J.), covered in theSept. 28, 2009, edition of the Troubled Company Reporter.PT-1 Communications, Inc., PT-1 Long Distance, Inc., and PT-1Technologies, Inc., sought chapter 11 protection (Bankr. E.D.N.Y.Case Nos. 01-12655, 01-12658, and 01-12660) on March 9, 2001.  TheDebtors filed their Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganizationdated as of August 31, 2004, and the Bankruptcy Court confirmedthat plan on November 23, 2004.Laurence May, Esq., and Greg Friedman, Esq., at Cole, Schotz,Meisel, Forman & Leonard, P.A., in New York, represent Edward P.Bond, the Liquidating Trustee of the Liquidating Trust U/A/W PT-1Communications, Inc., PT-1 Long Distance, Inc., and PT-1Technologies, Inc.RADIOSHACK CORP: Fitch Keeps Low-B Ratings, Gives Stable Outlook—————————————————————-Fitch Ratings has affirmed its ratings on RadioShack Corporation.The Rating Outlook is Stable.  RadioShack had $680 million in debtoutstanding at June 30, 2010.The affirmations reflect RadioShack’s relatively steady operatingresults as growth in its wireless business has offset soft salestrends in many of the company’s other business segments.  Theratings further reflect the company’s positive free cash flowgeneration, gradual improvement in its credit metrics, and reducedbut still adequate liquidity following RadioShack’s recent sharerepurchase authorization increase to $500 million.  Longer-termconcerns relate to RadioShack’s long-term ability to maintainrevenue and earnings growth given the technology cycle and highlycompetitive operating environment and the company’s shareholder-friendly posture.The growth in RadioShack’s wireless revenues of 25% and 55% in2009 and the first half of 2010, respectively, combined with thechange in the company’s product mix to include more popularproducts such as iPhones and iPhone accessories have enabledrevenues to remain relatively steady despite a challengingeconomic environment and as digital converter box salesanniversary (total revenues increased 1.2% and 4.3% in 2009 andthe first half of 2010).  The wireless segment, which accounts forapproximately 38% of 2009 total revenues, is expected to be thecompany’s key growth driver going forward.  This business hasbenefited from the addition of a third carrier, T-Mobile, inAugust 2009 and Fitch expects wireless carrier contracts will berenewed as they expire.  In 2010 and 2011, total revenues areexpected to increase in the low single digit range based onassumptions of low single-digit positive same store sales andmodest store growth (mainly kiosks in Target stores).RadioShack’s ongoing efforts to improve its inventory managementby offering more productive products, such as Apple products andmobile accessories, and control costs, such as labor and rentexpenses, have helped expand EBIT margin by 130 basis points to 9%in the last twelve months ending June 30, 2010, compared to 2008.This, combined with $92 million of debt reduction, resulted in theLTM total adjusted debt/EBITDAR decreasing to 4.0 times from 4.4xin 2008 and LTM EBITDAR to interest plus rent increasing slightlyto 2.3x from 2.2x during the same time period.  Fitch expectsRadioShack’s credit metrics to remain at current levels in 2010and to improve further in 2011 based on assumptions of relativelysteady operating profit levels and a lower debt balance in 2011 asthe company repays the $307 million outstanding on the 7.375%senior unsecured notes maturing in May 2011.  In addition, thecompany should continue to generate positive free cash flow of$100-$200 million in 2010 and 2011.RadioShack had cash of approximately $631 million at June 30,2010, pro forma for the $300 million accelerated share repurchaseagreements announced in August 2010.  In addition, the company had$291 million available under its $325 million credit facilityexpiring in May 2011, which Fitch expects will be renewed prior toexpiration.  While Fitch believes the company has adequateliquidity to meet upcoming capital and debt service requirements,such as the $307 million debt repayment and the expectedcompletion of the remaining $200 million in the share repurchaseauthorization, its financial flexibility will be reducedsubstantially.Fitch remains concern about RadioShack’s longer-term growthprospects as the company faces the challenges of turning arounddeclining sales in non-wireless product platforms.  In the eventof an unexpected weakening in the company’s operating performanceor free cash flow generation, the company’s ratings could bepressured.  In addition, the consumer electronics industry isfiercely competitive.  RadioShack competes with national big-boxretailers and discounters as well as wireless carriers and othernew wireless distribution channels.  These retailers offer a wideselection of consumer electronics and wireless products.Nonetheless, RadioShack’s large store base of 4,469 company-ownedstores across the United States as of June 30, 2010, will continueto provide a convenient shopping experience for customers.Fitch has affirmed these ratings with a Stable Outlook:  – Long-term Issuer Default Rating at ‘BB’;  – Bank credit facility at ‘BB’;  – Senior unsecured notes at ‘BB’.RANDAZZO PROPERTIES: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured Creditor————————————————————–Debtor: Randazzo Properties, LLC        P.O. Box 515        Fort Mill, SC 29716Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-07500Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       District of South Carolina (Spartanburg)Judge: John E. WaitesDebtor’s Counsel: Robert H. Cooper, Esq.                  3523 Pelham Road, Suite B                  Greenville, SC 29615                  Tel: (864) 271-9911                  E-mail: bknotice@thecooperlawfirm.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $500,001 to $1,000,000The petition was signed by Barbara Jean Randazzo Oriani, managingmember.The list of unsecured creditors filed together with its petitioncontains only one entry:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————York County Tax Collector          Property Taxes          $19,555P.O. Box 116York, SC 29745RAUL VALDERRAMA: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————–Joint Debtors: Raul Fernando Valderrama                 fdba A.C. Heating and Air Conditioning Service               Rosa Emilia Valderrama               998 Rosehedge Court               Concord, CA 94521Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-71976Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Northern District of California (Oakland)Judge: Roger L. EfremskyDebtors’ Counsel: Mark A. McLaughlin, Esq.                  LAW OFFICES OF MCLAUGHLIN AND WILDMAN                  3012 Lone Tree Way #300                  Antioch, CA 94509                  Tel: (925) 754-2622                  E-mail: nmclaug226@sbcglobal.netScheduled Assets: $1,546,361Scheduled Debts: $2,439,178A list of the Joint Debtors’ 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/canb10-71976.pdfREALTY FINANCE: Chapter 7 Filing Among Options———————————————-Realty Finance Corporation said in a statement that it isevaluating options, including a liquidation under Chapter 7 of theBankruptcy Code.In January this year, Realty Finance received from Beck StreetCapital a preliminary indication of interest in a transaction inwhich Beck Street would assume control of the Company without anypayment to the Company’s stockholders.  However, according toRealty Finance, « The preliminary indication of interest did notprovide for any infusion of capital into the Company; provided fora temporary deferral of newly proposed external management feesthat Beck Street proposed would be payable by the Company to BeckStreet; lacked a specific business plan; and provided that theCompany would issue warrants entitling Beck Street  to acquire anunspecified number of shares of the Company’s common stock for anunspecified price. »Realty Finance continued, « As a result of several factors,including but not limited to, the lack of capital commitment whichthe Board of Directors of the Company thought would be necessaryto institute a growth plan and the absence of a specific businessplan, the Company chose not to pursue this proposal any further.However, it indicated it would be willing to reconsider any futureproposal that would address the concerns raised by the Board ofDirectors of the Company. »The Company said it has solicited, evaluated and engaged indiscussions with respect to a wide range of strategic alternativesover the past three years.  It has investigated each proposal inlight of the circumstances surrounding the Company at the time,and will continue to do so in the future in the event the Boardreceives new or modified proposals.  The strategic alternativesthat the Board has received and investigated to date have eitherbeen determined not to have been viable or lacked sufficientinformation or credibility to enable the Board to make informeddecisions as to the merits of such alternatives or to proceed withsuch action. Given the Company’s current financial position, it isnot in the financial position to expend the cash or resources topursue proposals that are speculative.The Board continues to explore various strategic options for theCompany.  There is no assurance, however, that any definitiveagreement for any such strategy’s option will be reached. Inaddition, the Company has been evaluating a liquidation of theCompany, including filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and ultimatelymay determine to wind down the affairs of its business anddistribute remaining cash, if any, to its stockholders due to,among other things, the Company’s inability to complete astrategic transaction, the significant reduction in the value ofthe Company’s platform, the Company’s inability to execute itsbusiness plan, the Company’s inability to obtain new capital, theCompany’s lack of future sources of cash flow, the Company’soperating cash shortfalls, the Company’s ability to operate as agoing concern, the numerous defaulted investments in the Company’sportfolio, the significant reduction of Company personnel and thecontinuing volatility of real estate and real estate creditmarkets.The Company continues to focus on controlling operating expenseswhile effectively managing its investments, including CDO I.Despite the difficult commercial real estate environment and thedisappointing financial results, the Company remains committed tomaximizing stockholder value.                     About Realty FinanceRealty Finance Corporation — http://www.realtyfinancecorp.com– is a commercial real estate specialty finance company primarilyfocused on managing a diversified portfolio of commercial realestate-related loans and securities.ROBINO-BAY COURT: Wants Until October 29 to File Schedules———————————————————-Robino-Bay Court Plaza, LLC and Robino-Bay Court Pad, LLC, ask theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District  of Delaware to extendtheir time to file their schedules of assets and liabilities andstatements of financial affairs until October 29, 2010.The Debtors need more time to finalize their schedules.  TheDebtors commenced the task of gathering the necessary informationto prepare and finalize their schedules.                   About Robino-Bay Court PlazaWilmington, Delaware-based Robino-Bay Court Plaza, LLC, filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on July 28, 2010 (Bankr. D. Del.Case No. 10-12376).  The Debtor is represented by John D.McLaughlin, Jr., Esq., at Ciardi Ciardi & Astin.  The Debtorestimated its assets and debts at $10 million to $50 million inits Chapter 11 petition.An affiliate, Robino-Bay Court Pad, LLC, filed a separate Chapter11 petition on July 28, 2010 (Case No. 10-12377), estimating itsassets at $500,001 to $1 million and debts at $1 million to$10 million as of the Petition Date.ROCK & REPUBLIC: Has Until Oct. 21 to Justify Non-Disclosure————————————————————The Hon. Sean H. Lane grants, in part, New Pacific Rodeo, LLC’srequest to compel Rock & Republic Enterprises, Inc., to producedocuments, except those specifically reference an attorney as theauthor on the privilege log or the supplemental log.  The Courtreserves its decision on those 28 documents for which an attorneyis identified as the author to permit R&R to submit any additionalinformation to justify non-disclosure by October 21, 2010, at 2:00p.m. (Eastern standard time).  If the Court does not receive anyadditional information by that date, the Court will grant theMotion to Compel with respect to those documents as well.New Pacific is the lessor of real property located at 319 NorthRodeo Drive in Beverly Hills, California. R&R is the sublessee ofthe Premises.On March 13, 2009, New Pacific filed a complaint against R&R,among others, (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles County, Case No. BC409639), seeking, among other things, recovery of amounts dueunder the lease.Wendy S. Walker, Esq. — wwalker@morganlewis.com — at MorganLewis & Bockius LLP, in New York, represents New Pacific Rodeo.A copy of Judge Lane’s memorandum of decision and order datedOctober 19, 2010, is available at http://is.gd/g9KY0from Leagle.com                        About Rock & RepublicNew York-based Rock & Republic Enterprises, Inc., is a wholesaleand retail apparel company specializing in an avant-garde anddistinctive line of clothing.  Originally started in 2002 by itsChief Executive Officer, Michael Ball, primarily as an Americanjeans company, the Debtors have expanded their lines to includehigh fashion clothing for men, women and children as well asshoes, cosmetics and accessories.  The Company’s merchandise canbe found at most high end retail stores such as Nordstrom, NeimanMarcus, Bergdorf Goodman, Bloomingdales, Lord & Taylor, HarveyNichols and Saks Fifth Avenue, as well as in small upscaleboutiques.The Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 1,2010 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 10-11728).  Alex Spizz, Esq., andArthur Goldstein, Esq., at Todtman, Nachamie, Spizz & Johns, P.C.,assist the Company in its restructuring effort.  Manderson,Schaefer & McKinlay, LLP, is the Company’s special corporatecounsel.  The Company estimated $50 million to $100 million inassets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities.The Company’s affiliate, Triple R, Inc., filed a separateChapter 11 petition on April 1, 2010 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No.10-11729).The Court has extended the Debtors’ exclusive period to propose aChapter 11 plan until November 15, 2010, and its exclusive periodto solicit acceptances of that plan until January 14, 2011.  Rock& Republic has said it is in talks with a newly formed entitycalled GR Acquisition LLC, which offered to purchase its assetsfor at least $33 million.ROMEO SANTORO: Case Summary & 6 Largest Unsecured Creditors———————————————————–Debtor: Romeo Santoro        630 Brookside Drive        Toms River, NJ 08753Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-42198Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of New Jersey (Trenton)Judge: Raymond T. Lyons, Jr.Debtor’s Counsel: Bunce Atkinson, Esq.                  ATKINSON & DEBARTOLO                  2 Bridge Avenue, P.O. Box 8415                  Building 2, 3rd Floor                  Red Bank, NJ 07701                  Tel: (732) 530-5300                  E-mail: bunceatkinson@aol.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s six largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/njb10-42198.pdfROPER BROTHER: Plan Confirmation Hearing Set for November 3———————————————————–The Hon. Kevin Huennekens of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theEastern District of Virginia will convene a hearing on November 3,2010, at 2:00 p.m., to consider confirmation of Roper BrothersLumber Company, Incorporated, et al.’s Plan of Liquidation.Objections, if any, are due October 27.The Debtors have liquidated substantially all of their assetsexcept for the Lake Margaret Property and certain Causes ofAction.According to the Disclosure Statement, the Plan provides that onthe Effective Date, (1) each of the Debtors will be deemeddissolved; (2) the members of the board of directors of each ofthe Debtors aill be deemed to have resigned; (3) the Debtor willfund an account to pay the Convenience Class Claims; and (4) allremaining assets of the Debtors will be transferred to aLiquidation Trust for the benefit of the Debtors’ creditors.                 Treatment of Claims and InterestsClass 2 – Wells Fargo Bank’s Secured Claim will be paid in fullfrom the proceeds from the sale of property owned by the Debtorson which Wells Fargo had a valid, enforceable lien.Class 3 – Franklin Federal Savings and Loan Association ofRichmond’s Secured Claim — at the sole option of the LiquidationTrustee, (a) the legal equitable and contractual rights of theHolder of Allowed Class 3 Claims will be reinstated in full; (b)will receive in full satisfaction, settlement, and release of, andin exchange for, the Holder’s Allowed Secured Claim, (c) other,less favorable treatment as is agreed upon by the Debtors or theLiquidation Trustee, as applicable, and the Holder of the claim.Class 4 – Other secured claims — at the sole option of theLiquidation Trustee, will receive (a) cash in the amount of theAllowed Secured Claim on the later of the Effective Date and thedate the Claim becomes an Allowed Claim, or as soon thereafter aspracticable; (b) the property of the estate which constitutescollateral for the Allowed Secured Claim on the later of theEffective Date and the date the claim becomes an Allowed Claim, oras soon thereafter as practicable, or (c) other, less favorabletreatment as is agreed upon by the Debtors or the LiquidationTrustee, as applicable, and the holder of the ClaimClass 5 – General unsecured creditors are projected to receive aninitial dividend of 1% to 5.5% on their Allowed Claim, withadditional distributions based upon the realizations of theLiquidation Trust in liquidating certain trust assets, includingthe Lake Margaret Property.  The estimated initial distribution is$130,000 to $582,000.Class 6 – Convenience Class Claims will be paid 20% of the AllowedClaim on the later of the Effective Date and the date the Claimbecomes an Allowed Claim.A full-text copy of the Disclosure Statement is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/ROPERBROTHERS_DS.pdfThe Debtors are represented by:     Roy M. Terry, Jr., Esq.     John C. Smith, Esq.     Elizabeth L. Gunn, Esq.     DURRETTEBRADSHAW PLC     1111 East Main Street, 16th Floor     Richmond, VA 23219     Tel: (804) 775-6900               About Roper Brothers Lumber CompanyHeadquartered in Petersburg, Virginia Roper Brothers LumberCompany, Incorporated, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protectionon December 16, 2009 (Bankr. E.D. Va. Case No. 09-38215).The Company disclosed $13,752,899 in assets and $16,658,187 inliabilities.SAGECREST FINANCIAL: Antietam Files for Chapter 11 in Connecticut—————————————————————–Antietam Funding LLC sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection(Bankr. D. Conn. 10-52523) on October 20.  Antietam Funding LLCestimated assets of $50 million to $100 million and debts of$100 million to $500 million.Bloomberg News reports that Antietam said its primary asset is aportfolio of life insurance investments.   »Their sole business isto lend monies to finance payments of insurance premiums and, inthe event the borrowers fail to repay the loans, to foreclose onand own the underlying policies, » lawyers for Antietam wrote.Antietam, a subsidiary of hedge fund SageCrest II LLC that filedfor bankruptcy in 2008, seeks to have its Chapter 11 jointlyadministered with that of SageCrest.                      About SageCrest II LLCSageCrest II, LLC, is part of a group of funds that was formed toaddress the financial needs of companies which, due to theconsolidation of the banking and specialty finance sectors, hadbeen shut off from traditional sources of capital.  SC II and itsaffiliates conduct business chiefly through two lines of business:structured finance and real estate investment and development.  Intheir structured finance business, SC II and its units have madeloans to borrowers primarily in five areas: specialty finance;life insurance-related products; corporate; mortgage and realestate products; and specialty auto finance.  For real estateinvestment and development, the debtors have made loans orinvestments in the areas of hospitality, mixed use, multi-family,and commercial.  SC II and its affiliates have typically providedsenior secured, asset-based loans and related products to small-sized and medium-sized businesses that have a significant assetbase and are overlooked by many lenders in the mainstream capitalmarkets.  They have also provided junior or subordinated securedfinancing.Greenwich, Connecticut-based SageCrest Financial, LLC is managedby Windmill Management LLC.  SageCrest and its affiliates providedsecured loans to small and midsized business, specializing inlife-insurance products, real estate finance and auto finance.SageCrest Financial and SageCrest II LLC filed chapter 11petitions on August 17, 2008 (Bankr. Conn. Case Nos. 08-50755 and08-50754), and filings by SageCrest Holdings Limited (Bankr. D.Conn. Case No. 08-50763) and SageCrest Dixon, Inc. (Bankr. D.Conn. Case No. 08-50844), followed.James Berman, Esq., at Zeisler and Zeisler P.C., represents theDebtors in their restructuring efforts.   The Debtors estimatetheir assets at $100 million to $500 million.By orders dated August 27, 2008, and October 30, 2008, the courtapproved the joint administration of SC II’s case with that ofSageCrest Finance, LLC, SageCrest Holdings Limited, and SageCrestDixon, Inc., for administrative purposes.  On October 7, 2008, theUnited States Trustee appointed a committee of equity securityholders, including in its membership defendants Topwater ExclusiveFund III, LLC, and Wood Creek Multi-Asset Fund, LP.  The EquityCommittee is comprised of former investors in SC II with allcommittee members claiming they redeemed their investments in thatdebtor.  Asserting they are creditors — and not equity holders –of SC II, both Topwater and Wood Creek resigned from the EquityCommittee.SELF STORAGE: Failure to File MORs, Cash Use Motion Cue Dismissal—————————————————————–The Hon. Randall J. Newsome of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theNorthern District of California dismissed the Chapter 11 case ofSelf Storage of Walnut Creek, LLC.At a July 21, 2010 status conference, the Court ordered that aplan and a disclosure statement be filed by August 20; that theDebtor could not use cash collateral absent a consensual order oran order granting a motion for use of cash collateral; and thatthe Debtor was to timely file monthly operating reports; or thecase would be dismissed.  The Debtor filed a single documentcomposed as a plan but also purporting to be a disclosurestatement.  An order or motion for use of cash collateral isnot on file.  Monthly operating reports, past due for June andJuly, are also not on file.Walnut Creek, California-based Self Storage of Walnut Creek, LLC,filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on June 7, 2010 (Bankr.N.D. Calif. Case No. 10-46516).  Joel K. Belway, Esq., at LawOffices of Joel K. Belway, assisted the Debtor in itsrestructuring effort.  The Company disclosed $11,908,650 in assetsand $5,319,212 in liabilities as of the Petition Date.SIFY TECHNOLOGIES: Gets NASDAQ Deficiency Letter on Late Filing—————————————————————Sify Technologies Limited received a letter from the NASDAQ StockMarket indicating that Sify was not in compliance with thecontinued listing requirements under NASDAQ Listing Rule5250(c)(1), due to Sify’s failure to file on time, its AnnualReport on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 withthe Securities and Exchange Commission.  The notification letterfrom NASDAQ has no immediate effect on the listing or trading ofSify’s American Depositary Shares on the NASDAQ Global Market.As previously reported on October 15, 2010, Sify was unable tofile audited financial statements for the fiscal year endedMarch 31, 2010 at this time due to incomplete audit results from aminority-owned venture.Pursuant to the NASDAQ listing standards, Sify has 60 calendardays, or until December 17, 2010, to submit a plan to NASDAQ toregain compliance with the NASDAQ Listing Rules, and if NASDAQaccepts Sify’s plan of compliance, NASDAQ may grant an extensionof up to 180 calendar days from the due date of the Annual Reporton Form 20-F, or until April 18, 2011, to regain compliance withthe continued listing rules.  If NASDAQ determines that Sify’splan is not sufficient to regain compliance, NASDAQ will sendwritten notice that Sify’s American Depositary Shares will besubject to delisting.  At that time, Sify may appeal the delistingdetermination to a NASDAQ Hearings Panel.                        About Sify TechnologiesSify is among the largest Managed Enterprise and Consumer InternetServices companies in India, offering end-to-end solutions with acomprehensive range of products delivered over a common telecomdata network infrastructure reaching more than 600 cities andtowns in India.SOUTHWEST EQUITY: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary—————————————————Debtor: Southwest Equity Partners, LLC        9400 E. Mountain View        Scottsdale, AZ 85258Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-33509Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Arizona (Phoenix)Judge: Sarah Sharer CurleyDebtor’s Counsel: S. Matt Collins, Esq.                  LAW OFFICES OF S. MATT COLLINS LLC                  P.O. Box 7006                  Chandler, AZ 85224                  Tel: (480) 316-5769                  Fax: (480) 963-3933                  E-mail: smcollins101@qwest.netEstimated Assets: $100,001 to $500,000Estimated Debts: $100,001 to $500,000The Company did not file a list of creditors together with itspetition.The petition was signed by Clement Anderson, manager.STEPHEN JEFFCO: Case Summary & 19 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: Stephen Thomas Jeffco          dba STJ Trust          fdba Falls View Perennials               Jeffco & Starbranch               Jeffco, Starbranch & Soldati        154 Garland Road        Rye, NH 03870Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-14460Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of New Hampshire (Manchester)Debtor’s Counsel: Franklin C. Jones, Esq.                  WENSLEY & JONES, PLLC                  P.O. Box 1500                  Rochester, NH 03866-1500                  Tel: (603) 332-1234                  E-mail: fjones@joneswensley.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Debtor’s 19 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/nhb10-14460.pdfSYDNEY KING: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary———————————————-Debtor: Sydney William King        722 Sarabay Rd        Osprey, FL 34229Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-25009Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: United States Bankruptcy Court       Middle District of Florida (Tampa)Judge: K. Rodney MayDebtor’s Counsel: Richard J. McIntyre, Esq.                  MCINTYRE, PANZARELLA, THANASIDES & ELEFF                  6943 East Fowler Avenue                  Temple Terrace, FL 33617                  Tel: (813) 899-6059                  Fax: (813) 899-6069                  E-mail: rich@mcintyrefirm.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000The Debtor did not file a list of its largest unsecured creditorstogether with its petition.TAMARACK RESORT: Court Denies $2-Million DIP Loan Proposal———————————————————-The Hon. Terry L. Myers denied motions, both filed September 25,2010, by Tamarack Resort, LLC, to incur $2 million in DIPfinancing, and for the appointment of Links Realty Advisors, Inc.,by and through Michael Fleischer, as Responsible Officer for theDebtor effective as of September 24, 2010.John Miller, writing for The Associated Press, reports that JudgeTerry said the Credit Suisse Group-led proposal didn’t meetfederal law, was likely to default and had the potential tofurther hurt those already owed millions by Tamarack after its2008 collapsed.Tamarack seeks to borrow from an unidentified group of « DIPLenders ».  The DIP Motion indicates that « Candlewood InvestmentGroup or its affiliates » will fund at least 51% and possibly asmuch as 100% of the amount.  Credit Suisse is the administrativeagent and collateral agent for the DIP Lenders.  No specific DIPLender appeared, nor testified, and Credit Suisse’s long-standingcounsel in the bankruptcy appeared simultaneously for CreditSuisse in its prepetition capacity and for the DIP Lenders.The Responsible Officer Motion suggests that the ResponsibleOfficer will « act as the manager and governing body for the Debtorin all respects, including to exercise any and all rights andpowers of the Members, the Directors, the Board of Directors, theChief Executive Officer, and all other Officers of the Debtor. »Objections to both Motions were raised and asserted by the UnitedStates Trustee; the District; Wells Fargo Bank (as trustee inconnection with certain revenue bonds for a District LID); BAGProperty Holdings, LLC; Banner/Sabey II, LLC; Tri-State Electric,Inc.; Scott Hedrick Construction; MHTN Architects, Inc.; EZA, P.C.dba Oz Architecture; and Quality Tile Roofing, Inc.The Motions and objections were addressed in an evidentiaryhearing held on October 12 and 13, 2010, and taken underadvisement.In July 2010, Tamarack sought to employ CB Richard Ellis, a realestate consulting and marketing firm, « to attempt to market itsresort as a going concern. Credit Suisse and the U.S. Trusteeobjected to that request.  By agreement of those parties andTamarack, two hearing dates set in September were vacated and thematter is set for a hearing on October 25.  CBRE’s employment byTamarack remains unapproved.Judge Myers holds that the Motions are not well taken and wereinadequately supported by their proponents.  The Court says it wasTamarack’s burden to establish the adequate protection to non-Credit Suisse lienholders proposed to be primed, and it did notmeet that burden.  Even though DIP financing would have thepotential benefit of providing funds for winterization and forcasualty and liability insurance — expenditures no one arguedwere unreasonable — and provided sums for a partial payment ofamounts owed the State of Idaho under its lease, Tamarack had toshow that the financing was properly structured, disclosed andsupported by evidence.  It did not. »This is not about the desirability of a ski season at Tamarack in2010.  Nor is it about what ultimate result (reorganization, sale,or other) would best serve the area or its residents.  Nor is itan invitation to dictate by judicial fiat a perceived betterapproach to sale of the Resort and satisfaction of the competinginterests of all creditors and other parties, » Judge Myers says. »At bottom, it is a question of whether this specific financialand management proposal, made by Tamarack and supported by CreditSuisse, meets the standards that federal law imposes as acondition of its granting. »Judge Myers also holds that the Responsible Officer would assumeand perform some, but not all, of Tamarack’s DIP duties, whichwould leave a vacuum in the chapter 11.  All creditors areentitled to a DIP bound to the full performance and accountabilityrequired by the Bankruptcy Code.  Exclusion of DIP duties, coupledwith the proposed indemnification, exposes the estate and itscreditors.A copy of Judge Myers’ October 19 memorandum of decision isavailable at http://is.gd/gaIBRfrom Leagle.com. The AP reports that Jean-Pierre Boespflug, the French-bornmajority owner of the resort, said he’s working with his lawyer tocraft a new proposal, possibly within a week.                       About Tamarack ResortTamarack Resort LLC, a golf and ski resort in Valley County,Idaho, was sent to Chapter 7 after creditors submitted aninvoluntary petition (Bankr. D. Idaho Case No. 09-03911).  Thepetitioning creditors include an affiliate of Bank of AmericaCorp. owed $4.7 million.On April 9, 2010, Bankruptcy Judge Terry Myers signed an orderconverting Tamarack Resort LLC’s involuntary chapter 7 case to achapter 11 reorganization.The project’s 27.5% owner, VPG Investments Inc., filed for Chapter11 reorganization in 2008, only to have the petition dismissed inOctober 2008 at the request of the secured creditor, CreditSuisse, Caymans Islands Branch.  VPG was controlled by Mexicanbusinessman Alfredo Miguel Afif.  Credit Suisse, the agent for thesecured lenders, characterized VPG’s Chapter 11 case as « a classicexample of a bad faith filing » made « solely as a litigationtactic » to stop foreclosure.TAYLOR & BISHOP: Taps MCA Financial as Financial Advisor——————————————————–Taylor & Bishop, LLC, asks for authorization from the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona to employ MCAFinancial Group, Ltd., as financial advisor.The Debtor needs assistance from MCA to prepare cash flowprojections, asset valuations, feasibility analyses, and relatedanalyses.The hourly rates of MCA’s personnel are:         Morris C. Aaron                     $350         Jeff Harris                         $350         Tom Smith                           $225         Director                            $225         Managing Directors                $250-$295         Senior Managing Director            $350         Paraprofessional                     $75MCA assures the Court that the firm is a « disinterested person » asthat term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Phoenix, Arizona-based Taylor & Bishop, LLC, was formed in 2007solely for the purpose of owning and maintaining the real propertylocated at 1431 West Taylor Street, Chicago, Illinois, in order tohouse the National Italian American Sports Hall of Fame.  From itsinception, Taylor & Bishop has operated much like a non-profitcompany, its fundamental purpose being to pay tribute to Italian-American athletes and raise money for scholarships and othercharitable causes.Taylor & Bishop filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection onOctober 8, 2010 (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 10-32563).  John R.Clemency, Esq., at Gallagher & Kennedy PA, assists Taylor & Bishopin its restructuring effort.  According to its schedules, Taylor &Bishop disclosed $16,040,393 in total assets and $9,934,149 intotal liabilities at the Petition Date.TAYLOR BEAN: BofA Sues FDIC Over Mortgage Losses————————————————Karen Gullo, writing for Bloomberg News, reports that Bank ofAmerica Corp. sued the Federal Insurance Deposit Corp. (D. D.C.case no. 10-01681) over $1.75 billion in investor losses stemmingfrom an alleged fraud by Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp.Ms. Gullo reports that the FDIC has denied claims by BofA againstColonial Bank and another financial institution in receivershipthat bought fake mortgages from a Taylor Bean unit, Ocala FundingLLC, according to a complaint filed Oct. 1 in federal court inWashington.  BofA was the trustee for notes issued by OcalaFunding, according to the complaint.According to the report, BofA said Ocala financed Taylor Bean’smortgages, issued debt and used the proceeds to buy the mortgages.Ocala then sold the notes to pay off the debt or buy additionalmortgages, according to the compliant.  BofA alleged that from2000 to 2009, Taylor Bean and Colonial Bank schemed to steal fromTaylor Bean’s borrowing facilities to hide liquidity problems.                 About The Colonial BancGroupHeadquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, The Colonial BancGroup,Inc., (NYSE: CNB) owned Colonial Bank, N.A, its bankingsubsidiary.  Colonial Bank — http://www.colonialbank.com/– operated 354 branches in Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Nevada andTexas with over $26 billion in assets.  On August 14, 2009,Colonial Bank was seized by regulators and the Federal DepositInsurance Corporation was named receiver.  The FDIC sold most ofthe assets to Branch Banking and Trust, Winston-Salem, NorthCarolina.  BB&T acquired $22 billion in assets and assumed$20 billion in deposits of the Bank.The Colonial BancGroup filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection(Bankr. M.D. Ala. Case No. 09-32303) on August 25, 2009.  W. ClarkWatson, Esq., at Balch & Bingham LLP, and Rufus T. Dorsey IV,Esq., at Parker Hudson Rainer & Dobbs LLP, assist the Debtor inits restructuring effort.  In its schedules, the Debtor disclosed$45 million in total assets and $380 million in total liabilitiesas of the Petition Date.                          About Taylor BeanTaylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. grew from a small Ocala-based mortgage broker to become one of the largest mortgagebankers in the United States.  In 2009, Taylor Bean was thecountry’s third largest direct-endorsement lender of FHA-insuredloans of the largest wholesale mortgage lenders and issuer ofmortgage backed securities.  It also managed a combined mortgageservicing portfolio of approximately $80 billion.  The companyemployed more that 2,000 people in offices located throughout theUnited States.Taylor Bean filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection August 24(Bankr. M.D. Fla. Case No. 09-07047).  Taylor Bean filed theChapter 11 petition three weeks after federal investigatorssearched its offices.  The day following the search, the FederalHousing Administration, Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac prohibited thecompany from issuing new mortgages and terminated servicingrights.  Taylor Bean estimated more than $1 billion in both assetsand liabilities in its bankruptcy petition.Edward J. Peterson, III, Esq., at Stichter, Riedel, Blain &Prosser, PA, in Tampa, Florida, represents the Debtor.  TroutmanSanders LLP is special counsel.  BMC Group, Inc., serves as claimsagent.TAYLOR BEAN: Gissy Offers to Buy Jumbolair Note for $2 Million————————————————————–Eric Morath, writing for Dow Jones’ Daily Bankruptcy Review,reports that Gissy Holdings II LLC has agreed to pay Taylor Bean &Whitaker Mortgage Corp.’s bankruptcy estate $2 million for theJumbolair Inc. mortgage note and a minority ownership stake in thedevelopment, pending bankruptcy court approval.Mr. Morath relates that, according to court papers, Jumbolair hasfailed to make payments on its $7.36 million mortgage sinceJanuary 2009.  The loan is secured by a lien on the runway andother community property, but not land and homes owned by Mr.Travolta and others.Jumbolair is a Florida development near Ocala, Florida, where jet-setting home owners, including actor John Travolta, can parkaircraft in their backyards.  The key feature of the Jumbolairestates is that every lot has access to a taxiway that allowshomeowners to move their aircraft directly from their property tothe massive runway.According to DBR, Mr. Travolta’s attorney Michael J. McDermott,Esq., said Wednesday efforts to foreclose on or sell the propertywere stymied when lender Taylor Bean filed for bankruptcyprotection later in 2009.  Mr. McDermott said once the sale iscomplete, the hope is that development will restart in thepartially finished community.                          About Taylor BeanTaylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. grew from a small Ocala-based mortgage broker to become one of the largest mortgagebankers in the United States.  In 2009, Taylor Bean was thecountry’s third largest direct-endorsement lender of FHA-insuredloans of the largest wholesale mortgage lenders and issuer ofmortgage backed securities.  It also managed a combined mortgageservicing portfolio of approximately $80 billion.  The companyemployed more that 2,000 people in offices located throughout theUnited States.Taylor Bean filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection August 24(Bankr. M.D. Fla. Case No. 09-07047).  Taylor Bean filed theChapter 11 petition three weeks after federal investigatorssearched its offices.  The day following the search, the FederalHousing Administration, Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac prohibited thecompany from issuing new mortgages and terminated servicingrights.  Taylor Bean estimated more than $1 billion in both assetsand liabilities in its bankruptcy petition.Edward J. Peterson, III, Esq., at Stichter, Riedel, Blain &Prosser, PA, in Tampa, Florida, represents the Debtor.  TroutmanSanders LLP is special counsel.  BMC Group, Inc., serves as claimsagent.TF PUERTO RICO: Case Summary & 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors————————————————————-Debtor: TF Puerto Rico Corp.        P.O. Box 1319        Sabana Hoyos, PR 00688Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-09771Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Puerto Rico (Old San Juan)Debtor’s Counsel: Francisco R. Moya Huff, Esq.                  250 Ponce De Leon Avenue                  City Towers, 7th Floor                  HATO REY, PR 00918                  Tel: (787) 723-0714                       (787) 724-2447                  Fax: (787)-725-3685                  E-mail: moyahuff55@prtc.netEstimated Assets: $0 to $50,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000A list of the Company’s 20 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/prb10-09771.pdfThe petition was signed by Jose Gabriel Cordero Jimienez,president.TIGRENT INC: Consultant Named Interim Chief Financial Officer————————————————————-Charles F. Kuehne agreed on Oct. 14, 2010, to join Tigrent Inc. asthe Company’s Interim Chief Financial Officer effective Oct. 19,2010.Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Kuehne served as anindependent financial consultant for two years, providingexecutive-level financial management consulting services primarilyto manufacturing companies owned by private equity firms.  Between1998 and 2008, he held various corporate controller, accounting,auditing and financial reporting positions with Platinum Equity, aprivate equity firm, and its portfolio companies, includingPresident and Chief Financial Officer of Data2Logistics, VicePresident of Transactions Support and Chief Financial Officer forAcquisitions, and Chief Financial Officer of Milgo Solutions.  Mr.Kuehne is a Certified Public Accountant and holds an M.B.A. fromNova Southeastern University and a B.A. in Business Administrationfrom Ohio University.Mr. Kuehne’s employment will be at-will.  He will receive a salaryof $240,000 per year and will be eligible to participate in theCompany’s benefits programs available to all of its executives,including health insurance, life insurance, long term disabilityinsurance, and 401(k) retirement plan.                        About Tigrent Inc.Cape Coral, Fla.-based Tigrent Inc. (OTC BB: TIGE)– http://www.tigrent.com/– is a provider of practical, high- quality and value-based training, conferences, publications,technology-based tools and mentoring to help customers becomefinancially literate. The Company provides customers withcomprehensive instruction and mentoring in the topics of realestate and financial instruments investing and entrepreneurship inthe United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.The Company’s balance sheet as of June 30, 2010, showed $43.8million in total assets, $80.7 million in total liabilities,and a stockholders’ deficit of $36.9 million.In its Form 10-Q report for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, theCompany said it continues to incur a negative cash flow –totaling $5.9 million for the period ending June 30, 2010 — dueto the on-going challenges with sales of products.   »We haveinsufficient working capital to meet operating needs, raisingsubstantial doubt about the ability of the Company to continue asa going concern, » the Company said.In addition to the shift in strategic emphasis from live courseofferings to digitally-delivered programs, the Company said itcontinues to implement reductions in staff to align withanticipated sales level, decreased occupancy costs, and reducedoperating costs in all areas.  The Company is also in currentdiscussions with some of larger creditors to negotiate amountsowed.The Company said it if cannot generate the required revenues tosustain operations or obtain additional capital on acceptableterms, it will need to substantially revise its business plan,file for bankruptcy, sell assets or cease operations and investorscould suffer the loss of a significant portion or all of theirinvestment in the Company.TOMKINS PLC: Moody’s Downgrades Ratings on Senior Notes to ‘B2′—————————————————————Moody’s Investors Service lowered its ratings for the seniorunsecured notes of Tomkins plc and Tomkins Finance plc to B2 fromBaa3.  Tomkins was acquired in a leveraged transaction by PinaforeHoldings BV (Corporate Family Rating of Ba3), and as part of thattransaction a tender offer was made to redeem the notes ofTomkins.  Following completion of that tender offer, a meaningfulportion of the Tomkins notes remain outstanding.  The ratingdowngrade recognizes that the remaining Tomkins notes rank juniorto the secured debt incurred to fund the leveraged acquisition.In a related action, Tomkins’ short-term rating was lowered tonon-prime from Prime-3.  This action concludes the reviewinitiated on July 28, 2010.  The ratings of Pinafore Holdings BV,including the Corporate Family rating of Ba3, are unaffected bythis action.As part of the acquisition of Tomkins, Pinafore launched a tenderoffer for the GBP150MM of Tomkins plc notes due 2011 and theGBP250MM of Tomkins Finance plc notes due 2015.  About GBP41MM ofthe 2011 notes and GBP109 of the 2015 notes were tendered.Pinafore is required under its new senior secured creditfacilities to launch a second tender for the Tomkins plc notes dueDecember 2011 within 90 days.  The rating downgrade results fromthe junior priority which any stub pieces of Tomkins’ debt willhold in the capital structure of Pinafore.Subsequent to this action, Moody’s will withdraw all ratings ofTomkins plc and Tomkins Finance plc.  Pinafore has indicated thatit will not provide guarantees for the portion of the notes thatremain outstanding and it is not expected that financialstatements for Tomkins will be available.  As such, in Moody’sopinion, there is insufficient information to continue to assesseffectively the creditworthiness of the Tomkins plc/TomkinsFinance plc obligations.These ratings were downgraded and will be withdrawn:Issuer: Tomkins Finance PLC  – Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, to B2 (LGD 6, 92%)     from Baa3;Issuer: Tomkins PLC  – Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, to B2 (LGD 6, 92%)     from Baa3;  – Senior Unsecured Medium-Term Note Program, to (P) B2 from (P)     Baa3;  – Short-term rating, to Non-prime from (P) P-3;Outlook Actions:Issuer: Tomkins Finance PLC  – Outlook, Changed To Stable from Rating Under Review;Issuer: Tomkins PLC  – Outlook, Changed To Stable from Rating Under ReviewThe last rating action was on July 28, 2010, when the Baa3 seniorunsecured and the Prime-3 short-term ratings for Tomkins plc /Tomkins Finance plc were placed under review for possibledowngrade.Pinafore Holdings BV is the parent holding company for theoperations of Tomkins plc.  Pinafore is a diversified globalengineering company focused on industrial and automotive-relatedactivities — including power transmission, fluid power and fluidsystems — accounting for 79% of sales as well as buildingproducts accounting for 21% of sales.  In FY 2009, Tomkinsgenerated sales of US$4.2 billion and employed around 26,000people in 158 production facilities.TOUCH AMERICA: Milbank Settles Document Row——————————————-Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP has settled its appeal of abankruptcy order under which it would have had to turn over years’worth of privileged documents from its work for the now-defunctMontana Power Co, Bankruptcy Law360 reports.Law360 says the firm and the trustee for the plan trust of TouchAmerica Holdings Inc. filed a stipulated order of dismissalMonday.                        About Touch AmericaHeadquartered in Butte, Montana, Touch America Holdings, Inc.,through its principal operating subsidiary, Touch America, Inc.,develops, owns, and operates data transport and Internet servicesto commercial customers.  The Company filed for chapter 11protection on June 19, 2003 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No.03-11915)Maureen D. Luke, Esq. and Robert S. Brady, Esq. at Young ConawayStargatt & Taylor, LLP represent the Debtor.  In its schedules,the Company disclosed $631,408,000 in total assets and$554,200,000 in total debts.The Court confirmed the Debtors’ chapter 11 Plan on Oct. 6, 2004,and the Plan took effect on Oct. 19, 2004.  According to aregulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, theminimum distribution to unsecured creditors of approximately 65%,under the plan.  The Debtors ceased operations on Feb. 29, 2004.Brent C. Williams is the Plan Trustee pursuant to the confirmedPlan.  C. MacNeil Mitchell, Esq., at Winston & Strawn LLP andRobert S. Brady, Esq., at Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLPrepresents the Plan Trustee.TRENTON LAND: Has Until March 31 to Propose Chapter 11 Plan———————————————————–The Hon. Thomas J. Tucker of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theEastern District of Michigan extended Trenton Land Holdings, LLC’sexclusive periods to file and solicit acceptances for the proposedChapter 11 Plan until March 31, 2011, and May 31, respectively.Trenton, Michigan-based Trenton Land Holdings, LLC, filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on June 29, 2010 (Bankr. E.D.Mich. Case No. 10-60990).  Karin F. Avery, Esq., at Silverman &Morris, P.L.L.C., assists the Debtor in its restructuring effort.The Company disclosed $16,726,075 in assets and $65,925,596 inliabilities.TRIDIMENSION ENERGY: Agrees to Sell Assets to Sanchez Resources—————————————————————TriDimension Energy, L.P. has entered into an agreement with anaffiliate of Sanchez Resources, LLC pursuant to which Sanchez willpurchase substantially all of the oil and gas assets ofTriDimension Energy and its subsidiaries in a sale pursuant toSection 363 of the United States Bankruptcy Code.As previously announced, TriDimension Energy, L.P. and seven ofits affiliated companies (Axis E&P, LP, Axis Onshore, LP, AxisMarketing, LP, Ram Drilling, LP, TDE Property Holdings, LP, TDEOperating GP LLC, and TDE Subsidiary GP LLC) (collectively, the »Company ») filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, DallasDivision, on May 21, 2010.Sanchez agreed to a $28 million cash purchase price for theCompany’s assets, subject to certain adjustments including fortitle or environmental defects identified prior to the deadlinefor submission of alternative transaction proposals  and customaryadjustments for the economic performance of the assets fromNovember 1, 2010 to Closing.  The closing of the transaction issubject to customary conditions, including approval by theBankruptcy Court and consideration of alternative transactionsthat may be submitted prior to a deadline to be approved by theBankruptcy Court.  Until the entry of the Bankruptcy Court orderapproving the bid procedures pursuant to which proposals for analternative transaction involving TriDimension and itssubsidiaries may be submitted, TriDimension and itsrepresentatives are restricted under the Sanchez agreement fromsoliciting alternative transactions or engaging in discussions ornegotiations with potential interested parties.Vinson & Elkins LLP is lead bankruptcy counsel to the Company, andOttinger Hebert, L.L.C. is special counsel to the Company.Stephens Inc. acts as financial adviser to the Company in theChapter 11 reorganization and advised the Company on thistransaction.                      About TriDimension EnergyTriDimension Energy, L.P., and its operating subsidiaries, TDEProperty Holdings, LP, Axis E&P, LP, Axis Onshore, LP, AxisMarketing, LP, and Ram Drilling, LP, are engaged in theacquisition, development, exploration, production, and sale of oiland natural gas in Louisiana and Mississippi.  The Company leasesapproximately 165,218 gross acres of oil and gas property, andhave proven reserves of approximately 5.1 million barrels of oilbased on fourth quarter 2009 data.  Tridimension Energy disclosed$37,211,921 in assets and $45,389,239 in liabilities.TriDimension Energy, L.P. and seven of its affiliated companiesfiled for Chapter 11 on May 21, 2010 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Case No.10-33565).  The Company has retained Vinson & Elkins LLP as theirlead bankruptcy counsel, Ottinger Hebert, L.L.C. as their specialcounsel, FTI Consulting, Inc. as their financial advisors, andStephens Inc. as their investment bankers.ULTIMATE ESCAPES: Sends E-Mail to Members Regarding Oct 18 Auction——————————————————————In a regulatory Form 8-K filing Tuesday, Ultimate Escapes, Inc.disclosed that on October 19, 2010, it sent an e-mail to itsmembers regarding the results of an auction held on October 18,2010.The e-mail reads:     Dear Ultimate Escapes Members,     I am delighted to inform you of the results of     yesterday’s Auction.  Subject to the necessary     approvals, the Company accepted bids for a number of     assets, including a bulk bid that may allow members to     vacation in most of the homes to which you are     accustomed to travel.     Details are being finalized and will be presented to the     Court tomorrow at the sales hearing for approval.  Soon     thereafter, we, together with the successful bidder for     the bulk properties, will be in touch with you regarding     proposed membership benefits and future plans.     We believe this would be a very good result for members,     and we look forward to being in touch soon.     We thank you again for your support.  If you have     questions, you may continue to submit questions via email     to bankruptcy@ultimateescapes.com     Thank you,     Sheon Karol     Chief Restructuring OfficerThe Form 8-K filing gave no further details.                   About Ultimate Escapes, Inc.Ultimate Escapes, Inc. — http://www.ultimateescapes.com/– is a luxury destination club that sells club memberships offeringmembers reservation rights to use its vacation properties, subjectto the rules of the club member’s Club Membership Agreement.  TheCompany’s properties are located in various resort locationsthroughout the world.Kissimmee, Florida-based Ultimate Escapes Holdings, LLC, filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on September 20, 2010 (Bankr. D.Del. Case No. 10-12915).  Affiliates Ultimate Resort, LLC;Ultimate Operations, LLC; Ultimate Resort Holdings, LLC; UltimateEscapes, Inc. (fka Secure America Acquisition Corporation); P & JPartners, LLC; UE Holdco, LLC; UE Member, LLC, et al., filedseparate Chapter 11 petitions.Scott D. Cousins, Esq., Matthew L. Hinker, Esq., and Nancy A.Mitchell, Esq., at Greenberg Traurig LLP, assist the Debtors intheir restructuring efforts.  CRG Partners Group LLC is theDebtors’ chief restructuring officer.  BMC Group Inc. is theCompany’s claims and notice agent.Christopher A. Ward, Esq., at Polsinelli Shughart PC, and Gordon &Rees LLP represent the Creditors Committee.Ultimate Escapes estimated assets at $10 million to $50 millionand debts at $100 million to $500 million as of the Petition Date.ULTIMATE ESCAPES: Accepts Offers for Number of Assets—————————————————–Sheon Karol, chief restructuring officer of Ultimate Escapes Inc.,said the Company accepted bids for a number of assets, including abulk bid that may allow members to vacation in most of the homesto which they are accustomed to travel.According to the CRO, details are being finalized and will bepresented to the Court Oct. 22, 2010 at the sales hearing forapproval.  The Company together with the successful bidder for thebulk properties will be in touch with the Company membersregarding proposed membership benefits and future plans.Ms. Karol said, « We believe this would be a very good result formembers, and we look forward to being in touch soon.  We thank youagain for your support.  If you have questions, you may continueto submit questions via email to bankruptcy@ultimateescapes.com «                    About Ultimate Escapes, Inc.Ultimate Escapes, Inc. — http://www.ultimateescapes.com/– is a luxury destination club that sells club memberships offeringmembers reservation rights to use its vacation properties, subjectto the rules of the club member’s Club Membership Agreement.  TheCompany’s properties are located in various resort locationsthroughout the world.Kissimmee, Florida-based Ultimate Escapes Holdings, LLC, filed forChapter 11 bankruptcy protection on September 20, 2010 (Bankr. D.Del. Case No. 10-12915).  Affiliates Ultimate Resort, LLC;Ultimate Operations, LLC; Ultimate Resort Holdings, LLC; UltimateEscapes, Inc. (fka Secure America Acquisition Corporation); P & JPartners, LLC; UE Holdco, LLC; UE Member, LLC, et al., filedseparate Chapter 11 petitions.Scott D. Cousins, Esq., Matthew L. Hinker, Esq., and Nancy A.Mitchell, Esq., at Greenberg Traurig LLP, assist the Debtors intheir restructuring efforts.  CRG Partners Group LLC is theDebtors’ chief restructuring officer.  BMC Group Inc. is theCompany’s claims and notice agent.Christopher A. Ward, Esq., at Polsinelli Shughart PC, and Gordon &Rees LLP represent the Creditors Committee.Ultimate Escapes estimated assets at $10 million to $50 millionand debts at $100 million to $500 million as of the Petition Date.UNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: Fitch Puts B+/RR3 Rating to $750MM Notes——————————————————————Fitch Ratings has assigned a ‘B+/RR3′ rating to UnivisionCommunications’ $750 million 10-year senior secured note offering.Fitch currently has a ‘B’ Issuer Default Rating for Univision.The Rating Outlook is Stable.Fitch expects the proceeds of the issuance will be used to repay aportion of the company’s $7.45 billion term loan facilities dueSeptember 2014, effectively extending $750 million of secured debtby six years.  Successful completion of this offering and termloan repayment are conditions of the company’s current efforts toamend and extend an additional $2.5 billion of the term loan toMarch 2017, extend a portion of its $600 million revolving creditfacility to March 2016, and term out another portion of its RCF toMarch 2017.  These extended maturity dates will revert toJan. 29, 2015, if there are more than $250 million of unsecured2015 PIK notes outstanding on this date.  Fitch expects Univisionto use a majority of the $1.2 billion of cash proceeds receivedfrom Grupo Televisa to repay a portion of the PIK notes.Assuming the transactions close as contemplated, Fitch views themas a positive for the credit, in that they will provide Univisionwith a much larger cushion to strengthen its operating and creditprofile, with a longer and more staggered maturity schedule.Nonetheless, Univision will still face over $4 billion ofmaturities in 2014, which the company will be unable to handleorganically, given Fitch’s expectations of approximately$300 million of annual pro forma free cash flow.  Fitch expectsthe company will eventually address these maturities with acombination of bond issuance and free cash flow.  Fitch believesthat it is critical for the company to achieve Fitch’s anticipatedoperating momentum and credit profile improvement in order toaccomplish the refinancing.Univision’s ‘B’ IDR had previously incorporated Fitch’sexpectations that the company would resolve the PLA overhang andextend a portion of its 2014 maturities, positioning itself to beable to repay and/or successfully refinance these obligations atmaturity.  Fitch believes that the private equity owners and thesecured lenders remain motivated to facilitate Univision’s long-term viability, as refinancing an improved operating and creditprofile will provide more value than bankruptcy/debtrestructuring.  Underpinning this position is Fitch’s view thatthe company will be able to delever to a range of 7 times-9x totalleverage or 5x-7x on a secured basis by the 2014 maturity.The ratings incorporate Fitch’s favorable outlook on the U.S.Hispanic broadcasting industry, given expectations for continuedgrowth in size and spending power of the Hispanic demographic.Univision benefits from a leading market position, with duopolytelevision and radio stations in most of the top Hispanic markets,and a national overlay of broadcast and cable networks.  Fitchexpects mid-single digit revenue growth (excluding largely pass-through World Cup revenue) and low/mid-teens EBITDA growth in2010, driven by an improvement in advertising revenue, growth inhigh-margin retransmission fees, and the positive operatingleverage embedded in the broadcasting business.  Fitch’s positiveview extends through the intermediate term, and as a resultUnivision’s capital structure is expected to improve over the nextseveral years.  That said, there is very little room at currentratings for further operating challenges, cyclical or not, andEBITDA growth below Fitch’s expectations for a protracted periodwould likely pressure ratings.Fitch regards current liquidity as adequate, particularly in lightof minimal near-term maturities (mandatory annual term loanamortization of $100 million-$200 million through 2013).  AtJune 30, 2010 liquidity consisted of $207 million of cash and$120 million available under the $300 million accounts receivable(A/R) securitization facility, of which $45 million expires inMarch 2012 and $255 million expires in December 2013.  Fitchbelieves that amortization and cash interest expense will beeasily covered by internal cash generation.  Fitch expects thecompany to return to cash pay on the PIK note stub subsequent tothe partial repayment with the Televisa proceeds.  Fitch expectsthat going forward, annual free cash flow should approximate$300 million, a significant improvement from recent years.  Higherborrowing costs on the extended term loan and RCF will increasecash interest expense; however the partial repayment of the PIKnotes and expected cash pay will be a partial offset in lateryears.  Fitch anticipates that free cash flow will be usedprimarily for debt reduction, including mandatory amortizationunder the term loan as well as some potential discretionaryrepayments.Total debt of $10.4 billion at June 30, 2010, consisted primarilyof:  – $7 billion senior secured term loan facility due September     2014;  – $450 million senior secured draw term loan due September     2013;  – $594 million outstanding under the RCF, due March 2014;  – $512 million accreted value ($545 million face value) 12%     senior secured notes due July 2014;  – $1.7 billion 9.75%/10.5% PIK senior unsecured notes March     2015; and  – $180 million outstanding under the A/R securitization     facility, due December 2013.Univision’s Recovery Ratings reflect Fitch’s expectation that theenterprise value of the company, and hence, recovery rates for itscreditors, will be maximized in a restructuring scenario (goingconcern), rather than a liquidation.  Fitch employs a 7xdistressed enterprise value multiple reflecting the company’s FCClicenses in top U.S. markets.  Fitch stresses June 30, 2010 LTMEBITDA by 10%, which is approximately the level at which thecompany would be unable to cover its pro forma fixed charges.Fitch estimates the adjusted distressed enterprise valuation inrestructuring to be approximately $4.9 billion.  The transactiondoes not impact Recovery Ratings, as it is an extension of secureddebt.  The ‘B+’ rating for the secured facilities reflects Fitch’sexpectations for recovery near the middle of the 51%-70% rangeunder a bankruptcy scenario.  The ‘CCC’ rating on the $1.7 billionsenior unsecured notes reflects Fitch’s expectations for minimalrecovery prospects due to their position in the capital structure.Fitch is not assigning a rating to the convertible debenturesissued to Televisa.  Assuming these debentures rank subordinate tothe senior unsecured notes they would also be expected to recover0%.Fitch’s existing ratings for Univision are:  – Issuer Default Rating at ‘B’;  – Senior secured at ‘B+/RR3′;  – Senior unsecured at ‘CCC/RR6′.UNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: S&P Puts ‘B’ Rating to $750 Mil. Notes—————————————————————-Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services assigned New York City-basedUnivision Communications Inc.’s offering of $750 million seniorsecured notes due 2018 its issue-level rating of ‘B’ (at the samelevel as S&P’s expected corporate credit rating on the companyfollowing the completion of the previously launched amend-and-extend transaction).  S&P also assigned this debt a recoveryrating of ’3′, indicating its expectation of meaningful (50% to70%) recovery for lenders in the event of a payment default.The ‘B-’ corporate credit rating on Univision remains onCreditWatch with positive implications.  Other existing ratings onthe company remain unchanged.S&P expects the company will use proceeds of its $750 million of7.875% senior secured notes due 2020, to pay down existing seniorsecured term debt.  On Oct. 6, 2010, the company announced it wasseeking to extend a portion of its senior secured creditfacilities, which is contingent on the aforementioned notesoffering.  Under terms of the amend and extend, Univision isseeking to extend $2.5 billion of its $7 billion term loan toMarch 2017 from September 2014, and to push out the maturity ofits $600 million revolving credit facility to March 2016 fromMarch 2014.  In exchange for the extension, proposed pricingincreases by 175-200 basis points on both facilities.  Inaddition, the amendment will allow for future extensions, as wellas the issuance of first-lien, second-lien, or unsecured debtunder certain conditions, to refinance senior credit facilities. »Upon successful completion of the amendment and extensiontransaction, S&P expects to raise its corporate credit rating onUnivision to ‘B’ with a stable outlook, » says Standard & Poor’scredit analyst Michael Altberg.VALENCE TECH: Berg & Berg Loans $2.5 Million at 3.5% Per Annum————————————————————–Berg & Berg Enterprises LLC said it had loaned $2,500,000 toValence Technology Inc.  In connection with the loan, the Companyexecuted a promissory note in favor of Berg & Berg.  ThePromissory Note is payable on February 15, 2011 and bears interestat a rate of 3.5% per annum.On July 27, 2010, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized theCompany to engage in financing transactions with Berg & Berg, CarlE. Berg, or their affiliates from time to time in an aggregateamount of up to $10,000,000, if, and when needed by the Company,and as may be mutually agreed.  The above transaction was madepursuant to this authorization and following such transaction, thefull $10,000,000 has now been utilized under this authorization.The managing member of Berg & Berg is Carl E. Berg, who is theChairman of the Company’s Board of Directors and the principalstockholder of the Company.                     About Valence TechnologyAustin, Texas-based Valence Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: VLNC) –http://www.valence.com/– is a global leader in the development of safe, long-life lithium iron magnesium phosphate energy storagesolutions and provides the enabling technology behind some of theworld’s most innovative and environmentally friendly applications.Valence Technology has its Research & Development Center inNevada, its Europe/Asia Pacific Sales office in Northern Irelandand global fulfillment centers in North America and Europe.The Company’s balance sheet at June 30, 2010, showed$22.75 million in total assets, $94.51 million in totalliabilities, and a stockholders’ deficit of $80.37 million.PMB Helin Donovan LLP expressed substantial doubt about ValenceTechnology Inc.’s ability as a going concern following theCompany’s fiscal 2010 results.  The Company has incurred operatinglosses each year since its inception in 1989 and had anaccumulated deficit of $581 million as of March 31, 2010.  For thefiscal years ended March 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 the Companysustained net losses available to common stockholders of$23.2 million, $21.4 million, and $19.6 million, respectively.VANESSA WHITE: Case Summary & Largest Unsecured Creditor——————————————————–Debtor: Vanessa Redding White          aka Vanessa Redding        269 South Mansfield Avenue        Los Angeles, CA 90036Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-54721Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 18, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Central District of California (Los Angeles)Judge: Thomas B. DonovanDebtor’s Counsel: Michael J. Jaurigue, Esq.                  JAURIGUE LAW GROUP                  411 N. Central Avenue, Suite 310                  Glendale, CA 91203                  Tel: (818) 432-3220                  E-mail: michael@jauriguelaw.comEstimated Assets: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000Estimated Debts: $1,000,001 to $10,000,000The list of unsecured creditors filed together with its petitioncontains only one entry:        Entity                     Nature of Claim    Claim Amount        ——                     —————    ————Wachovia                           269 South Mansfield    $261,236794 Davis Court                    Avenue, LosSan Leandro, CA 94577              Angeles, CA 90036VE&E-NEVADA, LLC: Case Summary & 12 Largest Unsecured Creditors—————————————————————Debtor: VE&E-Nevada, LLC        560 Winchester Boulevard, Suite 500        San Jose, CA 95128Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-60843Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 19, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       Northern District of California (San Jose)Judge: Arthur S. WeissbrodtDebtor’s Counsel: Shawn R. Parr, Esq.                  PARR LAW GROUP, PC                  1625 The Alameda, #101                  San Jose, CA 95125                  Tel: (408) 267-4500                  E-mail: shawn@parrlawgroup.comScheduled Assets: $7,990,050Scheduled Debts: $3,876,936A list of the Company’s 12 largest unsecured creditorsfiled together with the petition is available for freeat http://bankrupt.com/misc/canb10-60843.pdfThe petition was signed by Vladimir Rivkin, managing member.VERTAFORE INC: Moody’s Assigns ‘Caa1′ Rating to $260 Mil. Loan————————————————————–Moody’s Investors Service assigned a Caa1 rating to Vertafore,Inc.’s proposed $260 million senior secured 2nd Lien term loan.Proceeds from the $260 million senior secured 2nd Lien term loanwill be used to refinance the $240 million senior unsecured termloan provided by TPG Capital and to pay fees, accrued interest andexpenses.  The Caa1 rating reflects the loan’s junior rankingwithin the capital structure and second lien security on thecompany’s assets.On July 8, 2010, Moody’s assigned a first-time corporate familyand probability of default ratings of B2 to Vertafore, Inc.Concurrently, Moody’s assigned B1 ratings to the company’s$75 million Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility due 2015 and$550 million Senior Secured Term Loan due 2016.  The ratingoutlook is stable.  The facilities were used in TPG Capital’spurchase of the company from Hellman & Friedman and its co-investor JMI Equity for a total consideration of $1.4 billion,which closed on July 29, 2010.                        Ratings RationaleThe B2 CFR reflects Vertafore’s high initial pro-forma leverage ofabout 7x (Moody’s adjusted debt to EBITDA following the close ofthe transaction) and the company’s relatively small scale andconcentrated business profile as a niche provider of softwareservices for the property and casualty insurance industry (e.g.,enterprise resource planning services for retail agents anddocument/workflow management solutions for P&C carriers).At the same time, the B2 rating is supported by the company’sleading market position (as one of two primary software providersin the P&C space), its recurring revenue base driven by asubscription hosting model and high levels of maintenancerenewals, and solid operating performance through economic cyclesin a business requiring minimal capital investment.  Vertafore’scustomer base is stable and would incur significant switchingcosts to change software providers given the need for agencies andcarriers to maintain an insurance distribution channel thatfacilitates the timely flow of information and transactionswithout disruption.The stable outlook reflects Moody’s expectation that Vertaforewill continue to maintain its solid market position and generateconsistent levels of operating profits and cash flows.  Moody’sexpects the company to reduce leverage to about 6 times (adjusteddebt to EBITDA) over the outlook period of 12 to 18 months.These first-time ratings/assessments were assigned:* $260 million Senior Secured 2nd Lien Term Loan due 2017 — Caa1  (LGD-5, 87%)These ratings remain unchanged/assessments revised:* Corporate Family Rating — B2* Probability of Default Rating — B2* $550 Million Senior Secured Term Loan due 2016 — B1 (LGD-3, 34%  from 35%)* $75 Million Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility due 2015 –  B1 (LGD3 — 34% from 35%)Headquartered in Bothell, Washington, Vertafore, Inc., with annualrevenues of about $300 million, is a provider of softwaresolutions to the P&C insurance industry.VERTAFORE INC: S&P Affirms ‘B’ Corporate Credit Rating——————————————————Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said it affirmed its ‘B’corporate credit rating on Bothell, Wash.-based Vertafore Inc.The outlook is stable.The issue-level and recovery ratings on the existing rated first-lien debt remain unchanged as well, as they have first-prioritystatus over the proposed second-lien issue and its valuation ofthe company has not changed since its July analysis.At the same, S&P assigned a preliminary ‘CCC+’ issue-level ratingand preliminary ’6′ recovery rating to Vertafore’s proposed$260 million second-lien term loan due 2017.  The preliminary ’6′recovery rating indicates its expectations for negligible (0%-10%)recovery for lenders in the event of a payment default.  Thecompany intends to use the proceeds from the new term loan torefinance its existing unrated $240 unsecured loan provided by TPGcapital in conjunction with their purchase of the company in July. »S&P affirmed Vertafore’s corporate credit rating in conjunctionwith the announcement of the refinancing of its unsecured loan, asthe minor incremental debt does not materially affect leverage orcash flow, » said Standard & Poor’s credit analyst AlfredBonfantini, « and its view of the company’s business position andoperational outlook has not changed. »  The company remains highlyleveraged, and while it has a defensible niche market position,healthy operating margins, and high recurring revenue base, S&Pbelieves that a narrow addressable market and overall marketposition limit the rating.  S&P expects the company will graduallyreduce its high leverage primarily through EBITDA growth, as itmodestly grows revenues and slightly improves gross margin.VITESSE SEMICONDUCTOR: To Hold Annual Meeting on January 19———————————————————–Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation said it plans to hold its AnnualMeeting of Stockholders on January 19, 2011.  The timing of theCompany’s prior annual meeting of stockholders held in May 2010,its first annual meeting held since 2006, departed from itshistorical practice of holding annual meetings during the firstcalendar quarter of each year.   »We are returning to this practicein 2011 and, as a result, are informing our stockholders of thefollowing deadlines for stockholder proposals, » the Company said.                          About VitesseBased in Camarillo, California, Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation(Pink Sheets: VTSS.PK) — http://www.vitesse.com/– designs, develops and markets a diverse portfolio of semiconductorsolutions for Carrier and Enterprise networks worldwide.The Company’s balance sheet at June 30, 2010, showed $94.02million in total assets, $130.49 million in total liabilities, anda $36.46 million stockholder’s deficit.In October 2009, Vitesse completed a debt restructuringtransaction that resulted in the conversion of 96.7% of theCompany’s 2024 Debentures into a combination of cash, commonstock, Series B Preferred Stock and 2014 Debentures.  With respectto the remaining 3.3% of the 2024 Debentures, Vitesse settled itsobligations in cash.  Additionally, Vitesse repaid $5.0 million ofits $30.0 million Senior Term Loan, the terms of which wereamended as part of the debt restructuring transactions.WASHINGTON TIMES: Faces Involuntary Bankruptcy Petition——————————————————-A lawyer, who was fired as an officer of an affiliate ofWashington Times LLC, filed an involuntary chapter 11 bankruptcypetition (Bankr. D. D.C. Case No. 10-01041) against the newspaperpublisher.  Richard A. Steinbronn, who signed the involuntarypetition, said Washington Times LLC owes Washington Times AviationLLC and a related entity $2 million.Steven Church and Dawn McCarty at Bloomberg News report that aninvoluntary-bankruptcy petition can be used by creditors to forcea company into bankruptcy to collect debts.  The company has 21days from the time it is notified of the petition to answer thecreditor claims. It can either accept the bankruptcy case or tryto have it thrown out.Bloomberg reports Mr. Steinbronn « was wrongfully terminated fromvarious positions in early 2009, » according to the bankruptcyfiling.  The petition includes promissory notes purporting to showintercompany loans among affiliates of the Washington Times.Bloomberg relates that the Washington Times’ average dailycirculation fell 17% to 67,148 in the six months through September2009, the most recent data available from the Audit Bureau ofCirculations.  That compares with declines of 6.4% at theWashington Post in the period, and 11% industrywide.WASHINGTON TIMES: Involuntary Chapter 11 Case Summary—————————————————–Alleged Debtor: The Washington Times LLC                  aka The Washington Times                      washingtontimes.com                      Washington Times National Weekly Edition                      News World Communications, Inc.                      News World Communications                3600 New York Avenue, N.E.                Washington, DC 20002Bankruptcy Case No.: 10-01041Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition Date: October 21, 2010Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court       District of Columbia (Washington, D.C.)Creditors who signed the Chapter 11 petition:    Petitioners                    Nature of Claim    Claim Amount    ———–                    —————    ————Richard Steinbronn                 Legal Counsel              $39013404 Hamer CourtHerndon, VA 20170Washington Times Aviation LLC      Loan                   $500,00013404 Hamer CourtHerndon, VA 20170Washington Times Aviation USA LLC  Loan                 $1,500,00013404 Hamer CourtHerndon, VA 20170XODTEC LED: Posts $843,400 Net Loss in August 31 Quarter——————————————————–Xodtec LED, Inc., filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q,reporting a net loss of $843,358 on $244,653 of revenue for thethree months ended August 31, 2010, compared with a net loss of$320,519 on $259,727 of revenue for the same period endedAugust 31, 2009.The Company has an accumulated deficit of approximately$5.9 million as of August 31, 2010.The Company’s balance sheet at August 31, 2010, showed$1.7 million in total assets, $3.1 million in total liabilities,and a stockholders’ deficit of $1.4 million.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on July 23, 2010,Simon & Edward, LLP, in City of Industry, Calif., expressedsubstantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as agoing concern, following the Company’s results for the fiscal yearended February 28, 2010.  The independent auditors noted that theCompany has incurred significant operating losses, has seriousliquidity concerns and may require additional financing in theforeseeable future.A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available for free at:               http://researcharchives.com/t/s?6ccd                         About Xodtec LEDHeadquartered in Jhonghe City, Taiwan, Xodtec LED, Inc. is aNevada corporation incorporated on November 29, 2006, under thename Sparking Events, Inc.  On June 28, 2009, the Company’scorporate name was changed to « Xodtec Group USA, Inc. » and onMay 17, 2010, the Company’s corporate name was changed to « XodtecLED, Inc. »The Company, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in the design,marketing and selling of advanced lighting solutions which aredesigned to use less energy and have a longer life thantraditional incandescent, halogen, fluorescent light sources.  TheCompany’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Xodtec Technology Co., Ltd.;Targetek Technology Co., Ltd.; UP Technology Co., Ltd., areorganized under the laws of the Republic of China (Taiwan).  TheCompany also owns a 35% interest in Radiant Sun Development S.A.,a company organized under the laws of the Independent State ofSamoa.* Former Greenberg Associate Admits to $500K Theft————————————————–Bankruptcy Law360 reports that a former Greenberg Traurig LLPassociate who specialized in bankruptcy and commercial foreclosurepled guilty Wednesday to federal charges related to a scheme tosteal more than $500,000 from the firm.Law360 says Michael Shaw was charged with one count of bank fraudin the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgiaand faces up to 30 years in prison.* High-Yield Bond Defaults in U.S. Remain ‘Well Below Average’————————————————————–The high-yield bond defaults in the U.S. rose slightly in thethird quarter but continue to fall « well below average, » accordingto new data from Fitch Ratings, Dow Jones’ DBR Small Cap reports.* Neuberger’s Distressed Debt Fund Raises $244MM in Share Sale————————————————————–Dow Jones’ Daily Bankruptcy Review reports that NB Distressed DebtInvestment Fund Ltd., a publicly traded investment vehicle ofprivately held U.S. asset manager Neuberger Berman, on Monday saidit raised $244 million in a secondary share placing, more thandoubling its size.* BOOK REVIEW: The Folklore Of Capitalism—————————————–Author: Thurman W. ArnoldPublisher: Beard Books, Washington, D.C.(reprint of 1937 book from Yale University Press). 400 pages.$34.95 ISBN 1-58798-025-8.The book picks up where Mr. Arnold’s previous book « The Symbols ofGovernment » left off.  In the first few chapters of fourteenaltogether there is some reiteration to give the content groundingbefore Arnold gradually moves into the new topics he wants to takeup in this work.  New examples are inserted with this reiteratedmaterial.  First written in 1937 as the Depression was draggingout with no end in sight, Arnold tries to identify — almost tofix — the basics of capitalism and democratic government it isintertwined with.  The style is intellectual and searching, thoughnot conflicted or yearning (as in romanticism).Mr. Arnold knows the elements of democracy he wants to identifyand also commend.  But keen-minded and unfailingly realistic as heis, Arnold knows the prolongation of the Depression has put thecapitalist system under strain so that questions about itseffectiveness and desirability are being raised and the appeal ofother economic and political systems is strong.  Thus Mr. Arnoldin his complex, intellectual, legalistic manner not only hones inon the fundamental principles, processes, and institutions ofdemocracy, but also implicitly and occasionally explicitly showsthe unsuitability of the European ideologies of Marxism,Communism, Fascism whose appeal was growing in America.This global political struggle — which came to a head with theoutbreak of World War II a few years after the book was published– has to be kept in mind as the backdrop for Mr. Arnold’sapproach to reminding readers of democracy’s strengths andresources.  In the circumstances of the time, it could by no meansbe taken as self-evident that democracy was a preferable form ofgovernment.  Though Mr. Arnold with his acumen of human affairsand human nature and both theoretical and practical knowledge ofpolitical science is convinced that it is, he faces the challengeof delicately, sympathetically, yet firmly and unmistakablyinforming others that it is.  In doing this, he moves back andforth between principles and ideals; actual and hypotheticalpractical circumstances; human nature and requirements, interests,and desires; and a paradigm of the concept of « individuality » andgeneral social needs.The word « folklore » in the title denotes a body of personssomething like a state, but not as formal or historical a body asthis term suggests.  To contemporary readers, the « folklore » inthe title might suggest a book of entertaining anecdotes or yarnsabout capitalism; something like the foibles or amusingmisunderstandings of capitalism.  But at the time, « folklore » hada nationalistic and cultural, in some cases ethnologicalsuggestion to it. In Germany, for instance, « volk » was a conceptused by the Nazis in their rise to power.  The concept of the »masses » was associated with Communism.  So Mr. Arnold is bringingout how capitalism is embedded in the American public.  He’strying to make readers more self-conscious of this so they willnot inattentively allow capitalism to be lost.Arnold’s book was written before today’s major political,economic, and cultural concerns of globalism, multiculturalism,consumerism, immigration, etc., came about.  So he does notaddress these explicitly.  Yet as his main interest is thecontinuation of capitalism as this is proper to democraticsociety, the subject matter is timeless.  Mr. Arnold writes aguide to the recognition and preservation of the sources andpillars of democracy in any time.Before serving in Franklin Roosevelt’s administration as the chieftrust buster, Thurman W. Arnold (1891-1969) from Wyoming was ahomesteader and sheep rancher in the still relatively undevelopedWest; and he was an artillery officer in France in World War I.He was a founder of the Washington, D.C., law firm Arnold, Fortas,and Porter.                           *********Monday’s edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative pricesfor bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices areobtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources duringthe prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing tableis compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reportedare not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actualtrades are probably different.  Our objective is to shareinformation, not make markets in publicly traded securities.Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy orsell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entityaffiliated 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 withinsolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 pershare in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look likethe definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.Don’t be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical costnet of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm’sassets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet forliabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at whichequity securities trade in public market are determined by morethan a balance sheet solvency test.A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in eachWednesday’s edition of the TCR.  Submissions about insolvency-related conferences are encouraged.  Send announcements toconferences@bankrupt.com/On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filedChapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets andliabilities delivered to nation’s bankruptcy courts.  The listincludes links to freely downloadable images of these small-dollarpetitions in Acrobat PDF format.Each Friday’s edition of the TCR includes a review about a book ofinterest to troubled company professionals.  All titles areavailable at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go tohttp://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today. Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday editionof the TCR.The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the weekthen-ending.For copies of court documents filed in the District of Delaware,please contact Vito at Parcels, Inc., at 302-658-9911.  Forbankruptcy documents filed in cases pending outside the Districtof Delaware, contact Ken Troubh at Nationwide Research &Consulting at 207/791-2852.                           *********S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O NTroubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-publishedby Bankruptcy Creditors » Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland,USA.  Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine Tumanda, HowardC. Tolentino, Joseph Medel C. Martirez, Denise Marie Varquez,Philline Reluya, Ronald C. Sy, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R.Villacampa, Sheryl Joy P. Olano, Carlo Fernandez, Christopher G.Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.Copyright 2010.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale orpublication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronicre-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without priorwritten permission of the publishers.  Information containedherein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but isnot guaranteed.The TCR subscription rate is $775 for 6 months delivered via e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the samefirm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereofare $25 each.  For subscription information, contact ChristopherBeard at 240/629-3300.                  *** End of Transmission ***

TCR_Public/101022.mbx – Bankrupt.com