Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): winding up its affairs, the right to assert the privilege devolves to the successor. Consistent with that holding, the right to waive the privilege has not been limited to matters arising under the Bankruptcy Code and has even been applied to corporations that have been dissolved by orders of liquidation where there is broad-based power of the liquidator to continue to engage in management-type activity. See, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, 129 F.R.D. 188 (M.D.Fla.1989); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Berry, Civ. No. 1-85-62 (E.D.Tenn., June 10, 1985) and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Ellis, Civ. No. CD-84-PT-2560-M (M.D.Ala., Dec. 23, 1985); but see, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. McAtee, 124 F.R.D. 662 (D.Kan.1988) (<HOLDING>); and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. 
 Holding statements: (A) holding weintraub not controlling once a corporation is dissolved (B) holding customs violation of statutory suspension of liquidation not actionable by importer who discovered improper liquidations after protest period had expired (C) holding that a challenge to liquidation instructions falls under  1581i jurisdiction (D) holding that claims of corporation vest in corporation (E) holding weintraub rational inapplicable to liquidations because corporation ceases to exist after liquidation order
Output (English): holding customs violation of statutory suspension of liquidation not actionable by importer who discovered improper liquidations after protest period had expired