what's your closest case of a post consummation situation in which equitable got a fan what's your what's your closest case to facts like get to stay there's some point at which it's too complex to unwind after this day yes there's five minutes remaining the question i'm trying to ask he was do you have a case that we could look to that would suggest that where this case falls on the spectrum is close enough to being simple that equitable movement shouldn't apply if there is no such case and there's no such case but if there was one it would be good to know about it from the st circuit not that i know started distribution why would that be a reason to request the stay yes good morning or good afternoon your honour's he said i don't be half of the debtor federal office munoz i would like to address what we understand is the gate keeping issue before the honorable court which is t appeal in this case your honor it is necessary to clarify the facts st of all twenty two months ago the bankruptcy court entered the order confirming the plan to use sick appeal the order nevertheless it requested a stay after the debtor had commenced payments and had requested the entry of final decree because the plan was substantially cons predators that had commenced making payments to all other creditors under all other classes under the plan and it had assumed the operation of its business so all of the factors and all of the requirements for your substantial consummation had been met once that happens the debtor seeks the entry of final decree it is at that juncture when used to request the state before the bankruptcy court th of that time nor did it seek an expedited consideration of that st of all this was a factor that was considered by the backup when it entered and it ruled on our motion to dismiss once the final decree honorable court seeks a state before the back which is denied seeks a state before this honorable court which was also the night nevertheless it has led to this nd half deal run its course without seeking an the termination of the same so what do we have truly right now we have a plan that was confirmed twenty two months ago the debtor has been paying promptly to all of its creditors under the plan for the past twenty two months and what was originally five hundred and sixty one thousand dollars in disbursements to date add up to one million one hundred thousand dollars including payments to use if they received the remedy that they sought it is necessary to state that you sick opposed the confirmation of the plan it was the only creditor that opposed the confirmation this was a consensual plan we're all voting except at the same so we had the support of all creditors except for you sick and what did they request there alternative was not dismissal there are turn it was kind version so let's say that this honorable court decides to reverse the opinion in order of the bankruptcy court what would happen is that the case would be converted chapter seven and what happens then we go back to square one we go back to what started seventy years ago in two thousand and thirteen when this case was filed chapter seven chesty would need to be appointed to three hundred and forty one meeting would need to be held schedules and statement of financial affairs would be  yield a trustee would have to employ its professionals make and and perform its duty as a fiduciary under the bankruptcy code administer the assets of the estates and all of this would cause a delay in detriment to all of the other creditors that have supported the plan the substantially consummated plan and who have been receiving payments as per the terms of the plan during the past twenty months so what we would have your honor would be an action that would be in detriment to all others under the speculation that you sick understands that a chapter seven would be better than a chapter bankruptcy code to undo post petition transfers made to cry editors as well as preposition transfers that theory that you sick has a credit would be created is really speculative why because the duty of the christie is to take all of the assets of the estate liquidate them and then pay according to the to the established payment priorities that is given under the man crip c code which is not necessarily the same priority under the plan and chapter eleven dollars we can ask as a different way if this scenario which you're describing is not a nightmare scenario if it came to pass and it happened would it be possible for that scenario to run only going forward so that the prior payments would just stay where they were not necessarily or honored because areas would have been possible without in order for that to be possible at the time look distribution there must have been a surplus i cheat by the trustee that would be enough to provide for what the debtor the one plus one the debtor has already paid plus an excess after taking into consideration chapter seven administrative expenses chapter eleven administrative expenses and all of their payments into the plan and that is something that is in my humble opinion is very point that would suggest that it could all just happen on a going forward basis i take it is it correct that is correct your honor one last question for me which is just there is a dispute it seems like in a certain sense whether we're supposed to review this under  we look at what are the equitable factors did he use a free server it's applet right it is uncontested that it did not it's the late at least ought to stay and it did not after it was de now i'd take the necessary measures in order to avoid the substantial consummation of the plan and as to what are the pragmatic factors that the court must consider what is the effect to all other parties as in what it all other parties are all other creditors that are not before the applique court and what judge to rahab brought which is a very important factor is the finality of bankruptcy proceedings which is one of the corner stor cornerstones us a reorganization process under chapter eleven which in this case has been fully achieved and which time has proven that the plan was feasible the debtor has complied and all creditors  well i understand that if the appellate just not preserve its applet rights as it happened in this case and we had it's not three months what the court needs to see is that twenty two months have elapsed since the plan was come from this plant was confirmed in september two thousand and eighteen and debtors started making payments in november two thousand and eighteen so this been for the past almost two years making timely payments in full compliance in a plan that was consensual and which all other creditors supported so even though this may seem like a simple case proper and should be applied and was properly upright and considered by the bankruptcy output panel because the effect against rd parties that are that are not before the applet court is detrimental and will have will have a significant impact because it's not that tomorrow there's going to be a check ready for them once the case is converted is stat this case would have to go back to square one we would go back seventy years this is a bankruptcy that was filed in two thousand and thirteen so we would go back to seven years schedules need to be filed a new three hundred and forty one meeting has to be filed a trustee has to administer the estate with in our opinion there is none and outlets proven when the bankruptcy court determined that the debtor complied with the best interest test the best interest to us what it means is that the case is better served through reorganization than through conversion why because pursuant to our evidence conversion will not give any dividend to unsecured creditors like you sick nevertheless under the plan the debtors have the opportunity to receive payments which they have been receiving we need to understand and this honorable court needs to understand one thing and that it is that since the beginning of this case used to kest been an aggressive and the tejas creditor to this debtor why i don't know but the record of the case shows that since two thousand and thirteen we have been even before this honorable court twice there was a prior process in which using try to appoint a chapter eleven trustee which was denied the bankruptcy applet panel denied it and this honorable court denied it also once those efforts were frustrated then they sought conversion and objected the confirmation and they were the only creditors that were seeking that remedy although their creditors sided with the debtor and they were trying to have to scase something is there any better that you can discern from this being decided on the merits in terms of the finale issue on the merits of the best interest question rather than jurisdiction once the fact decided that the appeal in its st instance was moot then there is no jurisdiction to girl to the underlying opinion of the bankruptcy court we was determined that once there is an intermediate determination of ness of an appeal there is a lack of jurisdiction to go into the underlying order you sick in it several cases that do not have similar facts as what we have here there were cases in which there was but i don't treat it like that asking a more practical question which is you seem rightly doing so does that give you just as much an out of the in terms of getting us moving as it would if we decided on the merits of the best interest question in and we understand that in the event that the court would enter into the underlying order we would also prevail because you sick has not proven that it was an abuse of discretion which is the standard of review for an order of confirmation of the plan that's time that concludes the arguments for today this session of the honorable united states court of appeals is now recess until the next session of the court god save united states of america and this honorable court