What is this? ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

[olivies]

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION TO EXTEND TIME
THIS CASE came on for consideration of the Motion to Extend Time (Additional) Within Which to File a Motion to Dismiss under 11 U.S.C. section 707 and a Complaint Objecting to Dishcarge under 11 U.S.C. section 727 filed by United States Trustee on November 24, 2010 (Document No. 28 ). The filing of this motion creates a contested matter under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014. Accordingly it is

ORDERED: 1. The respondents, if they oppose entry of an order granting the relief requested by the motion, shall file a written
response to the motion within twenty−one (21) days from the date of entry of this Order.

2. If the respondents fail to timely file written response to the motion, the Court will consider the motion ex parte and enter an appropriate order, upon its submission by the movant, without further notice.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers .....on November 29, 2010 .

This is what shows up in Pacer after the UST office requested yet another extension of time. (Motion to Extend Time (Additional) Within Which to File a Motion to Dismiss under 11 U.S.C. section 707 and a Complaint Objecting to Dishcarge under 11 U.S.C. section 727 Filed by United States Trustee)

Am I understanding it correctly that the Judge wants us (our attorney) to go along with the motion or to object to it? Is this unusual?

[despritfreya]

Are you saying that this is the 2nd or more such motions and the 1st or others up to this point were just simply granted by the Court without a hearing? If so, how many extensions have been filed and for what length of time for each?

The Court is asking you if you oppose this newest motion to extend. If you oppose it you must file a written response within the 21 days. If you do not file the response the Court will grant the motion. I cannot further comment without knowing the history of why such extensions are being filed by the UST.

Des.

[olivies]

Yes. It breaks down like this:

* June 28 Filed Ch7

*July. 30 341 held

*Aug 6 UST filed presumption of abuse.

*Sept 7 UST filed motion to dismiss.

*Sept 24 UST filed MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 707 AND A COMPLAINT OBJECTING TO DISCHARGE UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 727.

*Sept 27 Motion to extend time was ordered, granting 60 days.(no hearing)

*Sept 30 Hearing on motion to dismiss. ORDER CONTINUING PRELIMINARY HEARING ON THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS was made. Continued to 12/1, we the debtors were ordered to provide amended B22 and schedules I & J (amended means test was file, sched I and J was referred to with no changes made in the documents).

*Nov 24 UST filed a second motion to extend time, requesting 60 days. stating we filed an amended means test but no I & J and the UST has requested "additional documentation regarding finances" and we have not provided them. We have provided everything requested to our attorney. It's been alls quiet on the western front since our amended forms were filed back in October. Dec 1 was the hearing and the UST pops up with another request to extend time. I'm awaiting a response from our attorney.

(also should note I have not receive anything in the mail yet. We moved in July, and despite the fact that our attorney filed a change of address with the court, the UST listed our old address when listing us on the motion to extend time)

That brings us to the order directing response.

[tcreegan]

Hi olivies,

The way I read this, instead of just handing an extension to the UST, the judge is giving you a chance to respond first.

You can respond and tell the judge you already supplied to documents and that the UST hasn't figured out you changed your address....

Hope you can get your UST to sit up straight and fly right....

Tom in Colo

ps: is the change of address showing in PACER ?

[olivies]

Thanks Tom- anxious to hear from our attorney. If he can show we've sent stuff over, and she never responded except to ask for more time, that's a good thing.

Yes, the change of address does show in Pacer.

[despritfreya]

In response to:

"*Sept 7 UST filed motion to dismiss. *Sept 24 UST filed MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 707 AND A COMPLAINT OBJECTING TO DISCHARGE UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 727."

I am not understanding why a Motion for Extension as it relates to 707 would be necessary since a Motion to Dismiss, presumably under 707, had already been filed. As it relates to 727, that is different as 727 is the provision that completely denies a discharge and if a discharge is denied you can never file bk on the debts that are the subject of the denial.

"*Sept 30 Hearing on motion to dismiss. ORDER CONTINUING PRELIMINARY HEARING ON THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS was made. Continued to 12/1."

Ok, that was yesterday. What happened at that Hearing? Also, the Notice that prompted this thread, was it on the PACER system as of 12/1 or sometime before 12/1?

Des.

[olivies]

Des-
I'm not sure why the 707 and 727. My guess is she's just covering her bases. The last day for anyone to oppose to the discharge was 9/27. And once she filed the motion to dismiss she has a period of time to determine whether the dismissal is appropriate, right? This whole time our attorney has told us the UST office is just looking for clarification and backing up of numbers. We've provided everything that we have been told was requested. We've never heard back that this or that wasn't sufficient.

The hearing on 12/1 we did not go to- our attorney's office stance is it's only necessary for him to go (since it's 1.25+ hours for us to the courthouse). I have no idea what happened- I'm still waiting to hear back. I'm thinking there was no hearing, since the notice that prompted this thread was filed prior to the hearing on 11/29 and only showed up on Pacer 12/1.

[despritfreya]

In response to:

"And once she filed the motion to dismiss she has a period of time to determine whether the dismissal is appropriate, right?"

This is correct in the sense that the time period must be within reason. This is most likely why the Court has invited responses to the most recent motion. If, as you have said, you have provided everything the only issue remains is how long it will take the UST to evaluate what you supplied in an effort to determine if the Motion to Dismiss should be withdrawn or proceed to trail. The UST, like most of us in this business now, is quit busy so I am not surprised with the delay.

Check with your attorney to see if he is going to respond. A response could be that you do not oppose this one last continuance but anything further will be objected to as you have done everything that has been asked of you and you want your day in court.

Best of luck.

Des.

[olivies]

STILL waiting to hear anything. Emailed the attorney, he responded by sending and email to the UST and cc'ing me. He asked what information she still wanted so he could gather it and if she wanted updated schedules what "as of" date should he do those for.

I've heard nothing since.

Looks like I'll be putting in another phone call to the attorney tomorrow (which is $$ out of my pocket so it would be nice if I didn't have to. This filing has cost us an additional $1600 so far thanks to it being drawn out and questioned by the UST. ) I'm half tempted to email the UST directly myself since I now have her email address.