220808 ORD DENYING QCS MOT TO RECONSIDER VERSION AUGUST 8, 2022 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

----------------------------------------------------------x

In re: PROMESA

Title III

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO (Jointly Administered)

et al.,

Debtors.1

----------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

FILED BY QUALITY CONSTRUCTION SERVICES II, LLC

Before the Court is the motion (Docket Entry No. 21676 in Case No. 17-3283)2

(the “Reconsideration Motion”) filed by Quality Construction Services II, LLC (“QCS”) for 

reconsideration of this Court’s July 15 memorandum order (Docket Entry No. 21512) (the 

“Order”)3 sustaining the Three Hundred Seventy-Fourth Omnibus Objection (Substantive) of the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Authority, Puerto Rico 

Highways and Transportation Authority, Employees Retirement System of the Government of the 

1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case 

number and the last four (4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as 

applicable, are the (i) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (the “Commonwealth”) 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); 

(ii) Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (“COFINA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-

BK-3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) Puerto Rico Highways 

and Transportation Authority (“HTA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3567-LTS) (Last 

Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3808); (iv) Employees Retirement System of the 

Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-

BK-3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 9686); (v) Puerto Rico Electric 

Power Authority (“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-4780-LTS) (Last Four Digits 

of Federal Tax ID: 3747); and (vi) Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority (“PBA”) 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 19-BK-5523-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3801) 

(Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to software 

limitations).

2 Unless otherwise noted, all references herein to Docket Entry Nos. are references to Case 

No. 17-2383. 

3 Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them in 

the Order. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:21783 Filed:08/08/22 Entered:08/08/22 14:47:56 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 3
220808 ORD DENYING QCS MOT TO RECONSIDER VERSION AUGUST 8, 2022 2

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority to Late-Filed Claims 

(Docket Entry No. 17923) (the “Objection”) with respect to proof of claim number 179223 (the 

“Claim”).

“A motion for reconsideration of a previous order is an extraordinary remedy that 

must be used sparingly because of interest in finality and conservation of scarce judicial 

resources.” Lopez Jimenez v. Pabon Rodriguez (In re Pabon Rodriguez), 233 B.R. 212, 220 

(Bankr. D.P.R. 1999), aff’d, 2000 WL 35916017 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2000), aff’d sub nom. Lopez 

Jimenez v. Lee (In re Pabon Rodriguez), 17 F. App’x 5 (1st Cir. 2001). “The movant ‘must 

either clearly establish a manifest error of law or must present newly discovered evidence.’” 

Cherena v. Coors Brewing Co., 20 F. Supp. 2d 282, 287 (D.P.R. 1998) (citations omitted).

 

Here, QCS has not met its burden of establishing a manifest error of law or 

proffering newly discovered evidence justifying reconsideration. All of the arguments QCS 

asserts in the Reconsideration Motion are virtually identical to the ones previously made in its 

Response and were considered thoroughly by the Court in ruling on the Response. QCS has not 

identified any facts overlooked by this Court nor identified any law that was not previously 

examined by this Court. The Order confirmed the Court’s earlier oral decision to sustain the 

Objection, concluding that the belated Response, for which an extension had not been properly 

sought or granted, did not warrant relief from its prior decision to sustain the Objection. Neither 

the Response nor the Reconsideration Motion provides any basis for excusing QCS’ failure to 

respond to the Objection in a timely fashion or any proper grounds for reconsideration of the 

prior decisions. (Order at 6.) The Court also confirmed in the Order that it had considered and 

rejected any arguments with respect to “manifest injustice” (Reconsideration Mot. at 7–10), 

stating that “no grounds for relief enumerated in the 374th Omnibus Objection Notice apply in 

this instance” including whether, “in the opinion of the court, the interest of justice requires 

otherwise” (Order at 6–7 & n.6). The Reconsideration Motion does not identify any factual or 

legal infirmity in the Court’s conclusion. Thus, QCS has made no showing that reconsideration 

of the Court’s determination is warranted.4 

4 As stated in the Order: “To address the merits of QCS’s response to the Oversight 

Board’s objection is unnecessary.” (Order at 6.) The time to make any such arguments 

was by a timely response to the Objection. However, for the elimination of any doubt, 

adequate grounds for the Court to have come to the same conclusion on the merits can be 

found for substantially the reasons expressed by the Oversight Board in its Response of 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Authority, the 

Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority, the Employees Retirement System 

of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Puerto Rico Public 

Buildings Authority in Compliance with the Court’s Order Regarding Defective Pleading 

Response [ECF No. 21105]. (Docket No. 21484 ¶¶ 21–28.) For substantially the same 

reasons, the content of the Response, to the extent it could be interpreted as a request for 

reconsideration of the Court’s decision to uphold the Objection on the merits, failed to 

meet the high standard set forth above.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:21783 Filed:08/08/22 Entered:08/08/22 14:47:56 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 3
220808 ORD DENYING QCS MOT TO RECONSIDER VERSION AUGUST 8, 2022 3

Accordingly, the Reconsideration Motion is denied. This Order resolves Docket 

Entry No. 21676. 

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 8, 2022

 /s/ Laura Taylor Swain 

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN 

United States District Judge

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:21783 Filed:08/08/22 Entered:08/08/22 14:47:56 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 3