Pursuant to Section 1102(b)(3) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, this site provides information to creditors of Oz Gas, LTD (the "Debtor") regarding the status of the Debtor's Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in the Western District of Pennsylvania at Case No. 12-10057(TPA).
Thursday, May 2, 2013
Debtor Files Amended Plan and Disclosure Statement
On April 22, 2013, the Debtor filed a First Amended Chapter 11 Plan and
accompanying Disclosure Statement setting forth its newly proposed treatment of
creditors. A hearing on the Disclosure
Statement has been scheduled for June 6, 2013 at 10:00am in the Bankruptcy
Courtroom, U.S. Courthouse, 17 South Park Row, Erie, with objections to the
Disclosure Statement due by May 30, 2013.
Please feel free to contact us at ozgascommittee@quinnfirm.com to obtain a
copy of the Debtor’s First Amended Plan and Disclosure Statement, and/or any
other pleadings as filed.
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Court Enters Order Granting Objections to Debtor’s Disclosure Statement, Setting Mediation
On March 7, 2013, the Court entered an Order granting the
various Objections to the Debtor’s Disclosure Statement and, upon consent of
Counsel, denying the Debtor’s Chapter 11 Plan.
The Court further extended the exclusivity period for the Debtor to
propose and solicit a plan of reorganization until April 22, 2013, in order to
allow the Debtor and RBS to work toward RBS’s crucial assent to any plan by way
of mediation. The Court’s directive with
respect to mediation is subject to a key condition, in that the Debtor shall
provide RBS with an audited individual net worth statement for the Debtor’s
principal, Richard Osborne, on or before March 21, 2013. Concurrently therewith, RBS shall also
provide the Debtor with a detailed statement of its claims.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Objections Filed to Debtor’s Disclosure Statement
On or before February 28, 2013, several parties filed Objections to
the Debtor's Disclosure Statement supporting its Plan of Reorganization. The Committee filed an Objection, arguing in
part that administrative claims are underestimated, the Debtor’s proposed
treatment of creditors is not feasible, and the Debtor’s assets are severely
depleted. RBS filed an Objection,
arguing in part that its liens are being stripped down, the Debtor’s equity
holders are retaining their interests without any infusion of cash, and the Plan
includes improper third-party releases. The
United States Trustee also filed an Objection, arguing in part that the
financial information set forth in the Debtor’s Disclosure Statement is not
adequate or feasible.
Additionally, RBS filed a Motion for Approval of
Administrative Claim seeking a superpriority administrative claim on account of
its interest in the Debtor’s collateral allegedly not having been adequately protected. The Debtor also filed a Motion to Extend Exclusive
Solicitation Period with respect to the exclusive period during which it may
solicit votes for its Plan, citing scheduling issues that cause the need for
such an extension.
Court Denies Debtor’s Emergency Motion to Enforce the Automatic Stay against Receiver
Updating a previous post, the Court on February 27, 2013, entered
an Order denying the Debtor’s Emergency Motion to Enforce the Automatic Stay
(“Motion”) with respect to the efforts of the Receiver, Mark E. Dottore
(“Receiver”), to collect its fees from RBS in the Northern District of Ohio. The Court, in deciding the Motion on its
merits, found that the Debtor will not be negatively affected in any
significant way by the Receiver’s efforts.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Debtor Files Emergency Motion to Enforce Automatic Stay Against Receiver
On February 15, 2013, the Debtor filed an Emergency Motion
to Enforce the Automatic Stay and Request for Expedited Hearing (“Emergency
Motion”) with respect to the efforts of the previously-appointed pre-petition
Receiver, Mark E. Dottore (“Receiver”), to collect its fees from RBS in the
Northern District of Ohio. The Debtor
argues in part that the Receiver’s efforts violate the stay to the extent that
RBS may then charge those fees back to the Debtor on account of its loan
obligations.
FirstMerit, Debtor Oppose Committee’s Motion for Authority to Prosecute Fraudulent Transfers
Updating a previous post, on or about February 14, 2013, FirstMerit
filed an Objection to the Committee's Motion for Authority to Prosecute
Fraudulent Transfer Action (“Objection”).
The Debtor also filed a Response in Opposition to Motion for
Authority to Prosecute Fraudulent Transfer Action (“Response”, and together
with the Objection, “Objections”). The
Objections argue in part that authority to decide whether to pursue such
litigation should remain solely with the Debtor and that the cost of pursuing
such litigation is greater than the benefit to creditors in light of the Debtor’s
proposed Plan of Reorganization.
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Court Enters Order Approving Sale to Halcon Energy
On or about January 25, 2013, following a sale hearing, the
Court entered an Order Approving Sale of Certain Oil and Gas Leases Free and
Divested of Liens (“Order”) with respect to the Debtor’s sale of its Deep
Rights to Halcon Energy for $10m. Upon information and belief, the
sale to Halcon has been substantially consummated, and the bulk of the sale
proceeds have been paid to the Debtor’s primary secured lender, RBS Citizens,
NA, d/b/a Charter One, with the exception of certain holdbacks for
administrative expenses subject to further determination by the Court. A copy of the Order is available upon request
to ozgascommittee@quinnfirm.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)