Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): would materialize only if Opus West had sufficient general assets to pay such compensation.” As any payout from the benefit plans would only have occurred if Opus West continued to remain solvent, they assert, that contingency defeats any allegation that plaintiffs suffered a “concrete financial loss.” Examining whether plaintiffs suffered “concrete financial injury” begins with the principle enunciated in Diaz that RICO standing must be based on “a harm to a specific business or property interest.” 420 F.3d at 900. By agreeing to receive deferred compensation through Opus West’s top hat plans, plaintiffs made their right to receive the compensation dependent on the company’s ongoing success. The parties agree that the top hat plans provi osp., Inc., 441 B.R. 120, 130 (9th Cir.BAP2010) (<HOLDING>). As a consequence, courts in other contexts 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that funds deposited with ing were property of the bankruptcy estate because the ing account was held in the debtor hospitals name and the plan documents plainly provided that compensation deferred under the plan would remain part of the hospitals unrestricted assets and would not be held in trust the plan was unfunded and the hospitals obligations were purely contractual in nature the participation agreement that the doctor executed similarly acknowledged that any contributions to the ing account remained the sole property of the company based on these undisputed facts the bankruptcy court correctly determined that the doctor held no interest in the ing account funds (B) holding that funds held in escrow are property of the estate only to the extent of the debtors independent right to that property (C) holding that workers compensation awards remained property of the estate despite confirmation of the debtors plans where the confirmation orders specifically provided that property of the estate did not vest in the debtor until the completion of the plan (D) holding that executives participating in an unfunded top hat plan had no ownership interest in the  funds that could be forfeited the funds remain part of the general assets of the corporation subject to the claims of its general creditors (E) holding that a payment is under the plan when the debt is provided for in the plan
Output (English): holding that executives participating in an unfunded top hat plan had no ownership interest in the  funds that could be forfeited the funds remain part of the general assets of the corporation subject to the claims of its general creditors