Estimated Hearing Date: November 7, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. (Atlantic Standard Time)

Objection Deadline: August 6, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. (Atlantic Standard Time)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

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

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al.,

Debtors.1

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

PROMESA

Title III

No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

(Jointly Administered)

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of 

PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING 

CORPORATION, et al.,

Debtor.

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

PROMESA

Title III

Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS

This Application relates only to 

COFINA, and shall be filed in 

the lead Case No. 17 BK 3283-

LTS, and COFINA’s Title III 

Case (Case No. 17 BK 3284-

LTS)

SUMMARY SHEET 

TO THIRD INTERIM FEE APPLICATION OF PROSKAUER 

ROSE LLP FOR COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED AND 

REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED AS ATTORNEYS FOR THE 

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DEBTOR, PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING

CORPORATION, FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 1, 2018 THROUGH MAY 31, 2018

 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 

(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); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS) 

(Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3747). (Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to 

software limitations.)

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 35
1

Schedule 1

Summary of Fees and Expenses Paid to Date and the Balance of Fees and 

Expenses for which Allowance and Payment is Requested for the Compensation Period

Name of Applicant: Proskauer Rose LLP (“Proskauer”)

Retained to Provide

Professional Services to:

The Financial Oversight and Management 

Board as Representative of the Debtor 

Pursuant to PROMESA section 315(b)

Period for Which Compensation is Sought: February 1, 2018 through May 31, 2018 (the 

“Compensation Period”)

Amount of Fees Sought: $94,488.00

Amount of Expense Reimbursement Sought: $4,277.94

Total Fees and Expenses 

Sought for Compensation Period: $98,765.94

This is a(n) Monthly X Interim Final Fee Application 

This is the third interim fee application filed by Proskauer Rose LLP in in the Debtor’s Title III 

case. The total time expended in connection with the preparation of this interim application is not 

included herein, as additional time was expended after the Compensation Period.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 35
2

Third Interim Compensation Period

February 1, 2018– May 31, 2018

Statement 

and Date 

Served

Period 

Covered

Total Fees 

Incurred

Total Fees 

Requested 

(90%)

Expenses 

Requested

Fees Paid 

(90%)

Expenses 

Paid

Tenth

6/13/18

2/1/18 to 

2/28/18 $23,944.20 $21,549.78 $0.00 Pending $0.00

Eleventh

6/20/18

3/1/18 to 

3/31/18 $66,004.30 $59,403.87 $4,250.04 Pending Pending

Twelfth

7/03/18

4/1/18 to 

4/30/18 $4,539.50 $4,085.55 $27.90 Pending Pending

No 

invoices 

for May 

2018

5/1/18 to 

5/31/18 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Totals: $94,488.00 $85,039.20 $4,277.94 Pending Pending

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 35
3

Additional information required pursuant to the United States Trustee Guidelines for Reviewing 

Applications for Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses Filed under 11 U.S.C. § 330 by 

Attorneys in Larger Chapter 11 Cases issued by the Executive Office for the United States 

Trustee:

Blended Rate in This Application for All 

Attorneys

$759.002

Blended Rate in This Application for All 

Timekeepers

$620.00

Compensation Sought in this Application 

Already Paid Pursuant to Monthly 

Compensation Statements but Not Yet 

Allowed

$0.00

Expenses Sought in this Application Already 

Paid Pursuant to Monthly Compensation 

Statements but Not Yet Allowed

$0.00

Number of Professionals Included in this 

Application3

20

Number of Professionals in This Application 

NOT Included in Staffing Plan Approved by 

Client4

N/A

If Applicable, the Difference Between Fees 

Budgeted and Compensation Sought for This 

Application Period

N/A

Number of Professionals Billing Fewer than 15 

Hours to the Case During This Application 

Period

16

Any Rates Higher than Those Approved or 

Disclosed when Retained? If yes, calculate 

and disclose the total compensation sought in 

this Application using the rates originally 

disclosed at retention.

No. As explained in the Second Interim 

Application (as defined below), rates increased 

in accordance with Proskauer’s engagement 

letter on January 1, 2018. Rates have not 

increased during the Compensation Period.

 2 This rate excludes non-attorneys (e.g., paralegals).

3 As used herein, the term “professionals” includes all timekeepers.

4 As noted in the budget Staffing Plan, the number of timekeepers expected to work on the matter during the 

Compensation Period was 23, and thus the actual number of timekeepers was 3 fewer than anticipated.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 4 of 35
4

Schedule 2

Summary of Professional Services Rendered by 

Timekeeper for the Period February 1, 2018 through May 31, 2018

NAME OF 

PROFESSIONAL

(in alphabetical order)

DEPARTMENT

AND YEAR 

ADMITTED

HOURLY 

RATE5

TOTAL 

HOURS 

BILLED

(in this 

application)

FEES 

BILLED

PARTNERS

Bienenstock, Martin J. BSGR&B – 1978 $759 3.70 $2,808.30

Ferrara, Ralph C. Litigation – 1970 $759 .80 $607.20

Firestein, Michael A. Litigation – 1983 $759 1.20 $910.80

Mungovan, Timothy W. Litigation – 1994 $759 9.80 $7,438.20

Possinger, Paul V. BSGR&B – 1993 $759 2.20 $1,669.80

Rappaport, Lary Alan Litigation – 1979 $759 .10 $75.90

Ratner, Stephen L. Litigation – 1975 $759 2.80 $2,125.20

Richman, Jonathan E. Litigation – 1984 $759 20.20 $15,331.80

Rosen, Brian S. BSGR&B – 1983 $759 2.10 $1,593.90

Total for Partners: 42.90 $32,561.10

ASSOCIATES

Alonzo, Julia D. Litigation – 2009 $759 53.40 $40,530.60

 5 In the ordinary course of business, the standard hourly billing rates for Proskauer professionals and 

paraprofessionals are adjusted annually as of the commencement of the firm’s fiscal year on November 1 to reflect 

economic and other conditions and apply to matters in and out of bankruptcy cases. Pursuant to the Appendix B 

Guidelines, “rate increases” “exclude annual ‘step increases’ historically awarded by the firm in the ordinary 

course to attorneys throughout the firm due to advancing seniority and promotion.” Appendix B Guidelines ¶ 

B.2.d, n.2. Annual step increases are awarded by Proskauer in the ordinary course throughout the firm on May 1. 

Proskauer’s November 25, 2016 engagement letter with the Oversight Board (a copy of which is available on the 

Oversight Board’s website at https://juntasupervision.pr.gov/wp-content/uploads/wpfd/50/ 58b6126be2546.pdf) 

(the “Engagement Letter”) provides that Proskauer’s rates will be increased on January 1 (rather than on November 

1) by the lower of the percentage rate increase announced as of November 1 and four percent. Because 

Proskauer’s fees under the Engagement Letter are a blended rate (currently $759) for all attorneys and another, 

lower blended rate (currently $260) for all other professionals, no annual step increases will be applicable to the 

rates charged in this matter. As detailed in the Second Interim Application, Proskauer’s rates under the 

Engagement Letter increased from $730 per hour for attorneys and $250 per hour for paraprofessionals to $759 per 

hour for attorneys and $260 per hour for paraprofessionals on January 1, 2018, during the second interim 

compensation period. Rates have not increased during this Compensation Period.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 5 of 35
5

NAME OF 

PROFESSIONAL

(in alphabetical order)

DEPARTMENT

AND YEAR 

ADMITTED

HOURLY 

RATE5

TOTAL 

HOURS 

BILLED

(in this 

application)

FEES 

BILLED

DiGrande, Melissa Litigation – 2017 $759 6.90 $5,237.10

Kim, Mee R. Litigation – 2016 $759 6.30 $4,781.70

Ma, Steve BSGR&B – 2014 $759 .30 $227.70

Webb, Jeramy D. BSGR&B – 2015 $759 .20 $151.80

Total for Associates: 67.10 $50,928.90

LAW CLERKS

Carino, Elisa Litigation Law Clerk $260 10.20 $2,652.00

Stevens, Elliot R.6 BSGR&B Law 

Clerk – N/A $260 8.10 $2,106.00

Total for Law Clerks: 18.30 $4,758.00

PARAPROFESSIONALS

Miller, Tiffany Labor & 

Employment

Paralegal – N/A

$260 2.40 $624.00

Petrov, Natasha BSGR&B 

Paralegal – N/A $260 18.90 $4,914.00

Silvestro, Lawrence T. Litigation 

Paralegal – N/A $260 1.20 $312.00

Winkelspecht, Michael J. Professional 

Resources – N/A $260 1.50 $390.00

Totals for Paraprofessionals: 24.00 $6,240.00

PROFESSIONALS

TOTAL 

HOURS 

BILLED

TOTAL 

COMPENSATION

Attorneys, Law Clerks, and 

Paraprofessional Totals: 152.30 $94,488.00

 6 Admitted to the bar during the Compensation Period. Once admitted and sworn into the bar, the timing of which varies 

on an individual- and jurisdictional-basis, law clerks are reclassified and billed as associates beginning on the first 

day of the month following such admission.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 6 of 35
6

Schedule 3

Summary of Professional Services Rendered by Project 

Category for the Period February 1, 2018 through May 31, 2018

PROJECT 

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION HOURS FEES SOUGHT

201

Tasks Relating to the Board, its 

Members, its Staff, its Advisors or its 

Consultants

1.80 $1,366.20

202 Legal Research 23.40 $8,628.90

204 Communications with Claimholders 2.60 $1,973.40

205

Communications with the Commonwealth, its 

Instrumentalities or Representatives of the 

Commonwealth or its Instrumentalities

1.90 $1,442.10

206 Documents Filed on Behalf of the Board 81.30 $61,706.70

207 Non-Board Court Filings 5.90 $4,478.10

209 Adversary Proceeding .20 $151.80

210 Analysis and Strategy 4.40 $3,339.60

212 General Administration 4.50 $1,170.00

218 Employment and Fee Applications 26.30 $10,231.20

Total for All Project Categories: 152.30 $94,488.00

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 7 of 35
7

Schedule 4

Summary of Actual and Necessary Expenses Incurred 

for the Period February 1, 2018 through May 31, 2018

EXPENSE CATEGORY AMOUNTS

Lexis/ Westlaw $2,829.00

Reproduction $36.20

Transcripts & Depositions $1,412.74

Total: $4,277.94

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 8 of 35
8

Schedule 5

Blended Rate Chart

CATEGORY OF 

TIMEKEEPER

BLENDED HOURLY RATE

BILLED 

Domestic offices in which timekeepers 

collectively billed at least 10% of 

the hours to the bankruptcy case 

during the application period, for

preceding year, excluding bankruptcy

BILLED

In this fee application7

Partners $1,120 $759

Senior Counsel $950 $759

Associates (7 or more years since 

first admission) $829 $759

Associates (4-6 years since first 

admission) $768 $759

Associates (1-3 years since first 

admission) $613 $759

Law Clerks $537 $260

Paraprofessionals $301 $260

Other $442 $260

All Timekeepers Aggregated: $802 $620

 7 As explained in more detail herein and in the Engagement Letter, in connection with its representation of the Oversight Board, 

both inside and outside of Title III, Proskauer agreed to a custom fee arrangement, whereby (a) prior to January 1, 2018, 

partners, counsel, and associates were billed at $730 per hour, and all other staff were billed at $250 per hour, and (b) as of 

January 1, 2018, partners, counsel, and associates are billed at $759 per hour, and all other staff are billed at $260 per hour. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 9 of 35
Estimated Hearing Date: November 7, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. (Atlantic Standard Time)

Objection Deadline: August 6, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. (Atlantic Standard Time)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

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

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al.,

Debtors.1

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

PROMESA

Title III

No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

(Jointly Administered)

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of 

PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING 

CORPORATION, et al.,

Debtor.

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

PROMESA

Title III

Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS

This Application relates only to 

COFINA, and shall be filed in 

the lead Case No. 17 BK 3283-

LTS, and COFINA’s Title III 

Case (Case No. 17 BK 3284-

LTS)

THIRD INTERIM FEE APPLICATION OF PROSKAUER 

ROSE LLP FOR COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED AND 

REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED AS ATTORNEYS FOR THE 

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DEBTOR, PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING

CORPORATION, FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 1, 2018 THROUGH MAY 31, 2018

Proskauer Rose LLP (“Proskauer”), attorneys for the Financial Oversight and 

Management Board for Puerto Rico (the “Oversight Board”) as representative of the Puerto Rico 

 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 

(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); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-

LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3747). (Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers 

due to software limitations.)

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 10 of 35
2

Sales Tax Financing Corporation (the “Debtor” or “COFINA”), pursuant to section 315(b) of the 

Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (“PROMESA”), 2 hereby 

submits this third interim application (the “Application”),3 pursuant to PROMESA sections 316 

and 317, Rule 2016 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”),4

Rule 2016-1 of the Local Bankruptcy Rules for the United States Bankruptcy Court for the 

District of Puerto Rico (the “Local Rules”), and the United States Trustee Guidelines for 

Reviewing Applications for Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses Filed under 11 

U.S.C. § 330 by Attorneys in Larger Chapter 11 Cases issued by the Executive Office for the

United States Trustee, 28 CFR Part 58, Appendix B (the “Guidelines”), and in accordance with 

this Court’s Second Amended Order Setting Procedures for Interim Compensation and 

Reimbursement of Expenses of Professionals [ECF No. 3269] (the “Interim Compensation 

Order”), for (a) allowance of interim compensation for professional services performed by 

Proskauer for the period commencing February 1, 2018 through and including May 31, 2018 (the 

“Compensation Period”) in the amount of $94,488.00, $94,488.00 of which represents fees 

earned outside of Puerto Rico and $0.00 of which represents fees earned in Puerto Rico, and (b) 

reimbursement of its actual and necessary expenses in the amount of $4,277.94 incurred during 

the Compensation Period. In support of the Application, Proskauer respectfully avers as follows:

Jurisdiction

1. The United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico (the “Court”) has 

subject matter jurisdiction over this Application pursuant to PROMESA section 306(a). 

2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to PROMESA section 307(a). 

 2

 PROMESA has been codified in 48 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2241.

3 The Application solely pertains to fees and expenses incurred with respect to the Debtor’s Title III case and does 

not address fees or expenses incurred with respect to other services performed for the Oversight Board (a) on 

behalf of other Title III debtors, or (b) outside the Title III process.

4 The Bankruptcy Rules are made applicable to the Debtor’s Title III case pursuant to PROMESA section 310.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 11 of 35
3

3. The statutory predicates for the relief requested herein are PROMESA sections 

316 and 317.

Background

4. On June 30, 2016, the Oversight Board was established under PROMESA section 

101(b). On August 31, 2016, President Obama appointed the Oversight Board’s seven voting 

members.

5. Pursuant to PROMESA section 315, “[t]he Oversight Board in a case under this 

subchapter is the representative of the debtor” and “may take any action necessary on behalf of 

the debtor to prosecute the case of the debtor, including filing a petition under section [304] of 

[PROMESA] . . . or otherwise generally submitting filings in relation to the case with the court.” 

48 U.S.C. § 2175.

6. On September 30, 2016, the Oversight Board designated the Debtor as a “covered 

entity” under PROMESA section 101(d).

7. On November 25, 2016, the Oversight Board retained Proskauer at substantial 

discounts to its normal hourly rates, as shown by the Engagement Letter and by Schedule 5 

above.

8. On May 5, 2017, the Oversight Board issued a restructuring certification pursuant 

to PROMESA sections 104(j) and 206 and filed a voluntary petition for relief for the Debtor

pursuant to PROMESA section 304(a), commencing a case under title III thereof (the “Debtor’s

Title III Case”). Pursuant to PROMESA section 315(b), the Oversight Board is the Debtor’s 

representative in the Debtor’s Title III Case.

9. Background information regarding the Debtor and the commencement of the 

Debtor’s Title III Case is contained in the Notice of Filing of Statement of Oversight Board in 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 12 of 35
4

Connection with PROMESA Title III Petition [ECF No. 1, Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS], attached 

to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s Title III petition.

10. On December 15, 2017, Proskauer filed the First Interim Fee Application of 

Proskauer Rose LLP for Compensation for Services Rendered and Reimbursement of Expenses 

Incurred as Attorneys for the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, as

Representative of the Debtor, Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation, for the Period May 

5, 2017 through September 30, 2017 [ECF No. 2043] (the “First Interim Application”). 

11. On April 9, 2018, Proskauer filed the Second Interim Fee Application of 

Proskauer Rose LLP for Compensation for Services Rendered and Reimbursement of Expenses 

Incurred as Attorneys for the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, as 

Representative of the Debtor, Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation, for the Period

October 1, 2017 through January 31, 2018 [ECF No. 2870] (the “Second Interim Application”). 

12. On June 13, 2018, Proskauer served on the Notice Parties (as defined in the 

Interim Compensation Order) its tenth monthly fee statement for the period February 1, 2018 

through February 28, 2018. On June 20, 2018, Proskauer served on the Notice Parties its 

eleventh monthly fee statement for the period March 1, 2018 through March 31, 2018. On July 

3, 2018, Proskauer served on the Notice Parties its twelfth monthly fee statement for the period 

April 1, 2018 through April 30, 2018. Proskauer incurred no fees or expenses for the period May 

1, 2018 through May 31, 2018.

13. In accordance with the Interim Compensation Order and as reflected in the 

foregoing summary, Proskauer has requested an aggregate payment of $89,317.14 (payment of

ninety percent (90%) of the compensation sought and reimbursement of one-hundred percent 

(100%) of expenses incurred) and has received no payments with respect to fee statements filed 

during the Compensation Period.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 13 of 35
5

Summary of Services Rendered by Proskauer During the Compensation Period

14. The instant application is Proskauer’s third for interim compensation in the 

Debtor’s Title III Case. Proskauer worked for the Oversight Board to continue the significant 

progress achieved during the first and second interim periods. In the first interim period, 

Proskauer transitioned the Commonwealth and certain of its instrumentalities to Title III, and, 

among other things, negotiated a mechanism to resolve the Commonwealth-COFINA dispute 

over billions of sales and use tax revenues, and successfully defended against attempts by 

creditors to (a) seize the toll revenues HTA needed to maintain the Commonwealth’s 

transportation system and (b) seize PREPA and its revenues by putting PREPA in the hands of a 

receiver. In the second interim period, in the face of the devastation wrought by Hurricanes Irma 

and Maria, Proskauer worked with the Oversight Board’s officers and other professionals to 

assess the situation, take actions to ensure the provision of basic services and reformulate 

restructuring initiatives to reflect the changing economic landscape. Proskauer also successfully 

defended against numerous creditor efforts to enjoin the Oversight Board from proceeding 

toward a plan of adjustment based on the certified fiscal plan and to seize many revenue streams.

15. In this Compensation Period, Proskauer built on these important achievements. In 

the face of a liquidity crunch that threatened to halt PREPA’s operations and leave the island 

without electricity, Proskauer worked diligently with Government attorneys to secure court 

authorization for the Commonwealth to lend $1 billion to PREPA on a superpriority and priming 

lien basis, despite significant protest by creditor groups. The Court approved a $300 million 

superpriority loan with leave to return for approval of a larger loan with superpriority and a 

priming lien, if necessary and appropriate. Proskauer took a leading role in assisting the 

Oversight Board with the development, certification, and defense of revised fiscal plans that will 

provide the blueprint for Puerto Rico’s future prosperity and fiscal responsibility. Proskauer 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 14 of 35
6

drafted the appellate briefs in creditors’ appeals seeking to reverse decisions protecting HTA and 

PREPA revenues. Proskauer also played a key role in furthering the resolution of the 

Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute, a threshold issue involving billions of dollars’ worth of tax 

revenues the resolution of which is critical to a successful restructuring. Among others, 

Proskauer’s notable undertakings during this Compensation Period in furtherance and defense of 

the Oversight Board’s mandate under PROMESA of returning the Commonwealth to fiscal 

responsibility and access to capital markets include: 

• Certification of New Fiscal Plans and Budgets. Proskauer has played an instrumental 

and extensive role in the development and defense of new certified fiscal plans for the 

Commonwealth and its instrumentalities following the humanitarian and economic 

devastation wrought by Hurricanes Irma and Maria. While the Oversight Board 

worked closely with the Commonwealth in trying to certify plans submitted by the 

Commonwealth and certain of its instrumentalities, these fiscal plans were ultimately 

rejected by the Oversight Board, which developed and certified its own fiscal plans. 

Proskauer assisted the Oversight Board in this regard, including working with the 

Oversight Board’s financial advisors to rigorously analyze data, assess the economic 

and structural impact of proposed fiscal plans, and ultimately assist the Oversight 

Board in drafting and certifying fiscal plans that will help achieve PROMESA’s 

purpose of instilling financial responsibility and restoring the island’s access to capital 

markets.

• Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute. Proskauer furthered the Oversight Board’s 

important and active role with respect to the Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute, a 

dispute central to the Commonwealth’s restructuring. During the Compensation 

Period, Proskauer drafted and filed a joint urgent motion with the Commonwealth and 

COFINA agents seeking an order expanding the agents’ mediation and immunity 

protections to allow them to participate in a mediation agenda prepared by the judicial 

mediators. This motion was granted after Proskauer successfully defended it from 

objections by both the Government and creditors. In addition, in connection with a 

directive from the Court, Proskauer prepared a report confirming the Oversight 

Board’s, Commonwealth Agent’s, and COFINA Agent’s compliance with the 

Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute Stipulation. Proskauer also closely monitored, 

analyzed, researched, and advised on myriad issues raised in the dispute, including 

opposing the COFINA Agent’s motion to certify questions of Puerto Rico Law to the 

Supreme Court of Puerto Rico. The Court denied the motion to certify, agreeing with 

the Oversight Board’s assessment of the situation and the pleadings prepared and filed 

by Proskauer. Finally, Proskauer advised the Oversight Board in connection with a 

motion filed by AFSCME that sought to compel compliance with the stipulation 

governing the Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute. The Court eventually issued a 

ruling consistent with the Oversight Board’s position. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 15 of 35
7

• UCC Rule 2004 Motion. Proskauer defended against a renewed motion by the UCC 

seeking to undertake an expansive discovery program pursuant to Rule 2004, which 

program overlapped with the Oversight Board’s pending investigation into financial 

institutions previously involved in bond sales. The discovery would be extremely 

burdensome and costly when Puerto Rico’s resources are already stretched extremely 

thin, and unnecessary given that the Oversight Board has already retained an 

Independent Investigator to investigate the same issues transparently and in 

cooperation with the UCC and the Retiree Committee. The motion has been fully 

briefed before Judge Dein, who has held the motion in abeyance to provide the 

Independent Investigator with additional time to complete its investigation and file 

procedures governing the sharing of information collected in the course of its 

investigation. In addition, following extensive briefing by Proskauer, Judge Dein 

affirmed the Oversight Board’s position that a wholesale production of documents 

relating to the development of fiscal plans was unwarranted and would be 

counterproductive. Accordingly, Proskauer was tasked with determining categories of 

documents deemed privileged and recommending subsequent production procedures.

• PREPA Postpetition Financing Motion. Hurricanes Irma and Maria devastated Puerto 

Rico’s electrical grid and left more than half of the island without electricity for many 

months. As a result, PREPA was left with significantly reduced cash collections and a 

dire need for financial resources to continue operations. Acting on PREPA’s 

emergency need, Proskauer worked with the Commonwealth, PREPA, and their 

respective advisors to determine (i) terms on which the Commonwealth could and 

should lend money to PREPA, (ii) PREPA’s cash needs, and (iii) a marketing process 

for postpetition financing. Proskauer drafted pleadings seeking approval of financing 

having superpriority and priming liens, with the Court ultimately granting a $300 

million superpriority financing and providing that PREPA may apply for more 

financing on the original proposed terms if warranted. As part of this process, 

Proskauer engaged in numerous rounds of negotiations with creditors to achieve 

amendments acceptable to the Court and various constituencies. 

16. One of Proskauer’s primary roles has been the defense of the Title III Debtors’

interests in numerous, multi-billion-dollar adversary proceedings and contested matters brought 

by various bondholders and monoline insurers. Such matters seek, among other things, to enjoin 

the Oversight Board from proposing a plan of adjustment consistent with the Commonwealth’s 

certified fiscal plan, to nullify the Commonwealth’s certified fiscal plan, and to compel turnovers 

of billions of dollars of revenues critical to the Commonwealth’s viability and the provision of 

public services on the island in the wake of the hurricanes. Proskauer has defended against these 

challenges and raised numerous legal issues, many of first impression, involving, among other 

things, the constitutionality of various PROMESA provisions, the correct interpretation of 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 16 of 35
8

various sections of PROMESA and the Bankruptcy Code, and the validity of certain creditors’ 

asserted liens. The following is a summary of major litigation matters in which Proskauer served 

as lead counsel for the Title III Debtors during the Compensation Period:

• Peaje Investment, LLC v. Puerto Rico Highways & Trans. Authority, et al., Adv. Proc. 

No. 17-00151/152: Action brought by a holder of $64 million worth of 1968 HTA 

bonds seeking an injunction against HTA’s use of its revenues and requesting 

adequate protection. Proskauer vigorously defended the action. Plaintiff’s motion 

(which was the subject of factual and expert discovery, a full evidentiary hearing, and 

extensive briefing) was denied by the Court, which found plaintiff failed to show it 

had a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits regarding its claim of a 

statutory lien. Plaintiffs appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals 

for the First Circuit (the “First Circuit”). The issues before the First Circuit stem from 

whether or not plaintiff is entitled to receive debt payments prior to confirmation of a 

plan of adjustment and whether it showed a probability of success on its contention it 

held a statutory lien. Both Proskauer and plaintiff fully briefed their respective issues 

before the First Circuit and on June 5, 2018, Proskauer presented oral argument. The 

First Circuit took the arguments sub judice.

• Assured Guaranty Corp., et al. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, et al., Adv. Proc. 

No. 17-00155/156: Action brought by HTA bond insurers to require turnover of HTA 

revenues for postpetition debt service under sections 922 and 928 of the Bankruptcy 

Code. Proskauer fully briefed and argued a motion to dismiss the action, which the 

Court granted, closing the adversary proceeding. A notice of appeal to the First 

Circuit was filed. The Appellant filed its brief, and on July 9, 2018, Proskauer filed

the Appellee’s brief, after having also reviewed and taken into consideration the 

amicus briefs filed by the National Federation of Municipal Analysts and the 

Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.

• Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, et al., Adv. Proc. No. 17-

00159: Action brought by an HTA bond insurer (i) claiming unconstitutional takings 

and due process violations, (ii) seeking turnover of HTA revenues for postpetition debt 

service under sections 922 and 928 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (iii) seeking to 

compel payment of “claw back” revenues to HTA for the bondholders’

benefit. Proskauer fully briefed and argued a motion to dismiss the complaint, which 

the Court granted. The case is currently on appeal to the First Circuit. Plaintiff filed 

its brief and Proskauer is in the process of drafting and preparing to file the Appellee’s 

brief, which will be filed on or before August 20, 2018.

• ACP Master LTD., et al. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, et al., Adv. Proc. No. 17-

00189: Action brought by holders of GO bond debt to obtain declaratory and 

injunctive relief restricting the Commonwealth’s use of essential “claw back” and 

property tax revenues. Proskauer fully briefed and argued a motion to dismiss, which 

the Court granted. Plaintiffs appealed the judgment to the First Circuit. Plaintiffs 

have filed their brief, and on July 2, 2018, Proskauer filed the Appellees’ brief. 

Additionally, Proskauer responded to the UCC’s motion to be recognized as an 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 17 of 35
9

appellee in the appeal, arguing the UCC lacked constitutional standing. Finally, 

Proskauer has reviewed and taken into consideration the amicus briefs filed by a group 

of ERS’s secured claimholders.

• Asociación de Profesoras y Profesores del Recinto Universitario de Mayagüez, Inc. v. 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, et al., Adv. Proc. No. 17-00197: Action brought by 

APRUM against the Commonwealth, the Oversight Board, Governor, the Hon. Raúl 

Maldonado Gautier, José Iván Marrero Rosado, and Natalie A. Jaresko to enjoin the 

defendants from presenting any plan of adjustment until a new fiscal plan is 

formulated and certified. In their motion to dismiss the original complaint, Defendants 

argued (i) the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction; (ii) plaintiff lacks standing and is 

not a party in interest; and (iii) PROMESA prohibits the Court from interfering with 

the Commonwealth’s decisions about the use of its property and revenues. Plaintiff 

filed an amended complaint on May 11, 2018, in which it sought a declaration that 

UPR’s services are indispensable and an order enjoining the filing of a plan of 

adjustment until recasting of the Fiscal Plan and 2017-2018 Budget has occurred. 

Proskauer has worked with counsel for the co-defendants to draft a response to the 

amended complaint.

• Voya Institutional Trust Co. v. Univ. of P.R., et al., Adv. Proc. No. 17-

00216: Plaintiff, Voya Institutional Trust Company (“VITC”), as trustee for the 

University of Puerto Rico deferred compensation plan (the “DFC Plan”), filed a 

complaint against UPR, the president of UPR and the Governor, seeking a 

determination as to whether (i) VITC can comply with UPR’s request to transfer DFC 

Plan funds to a successor trustee under PROMESA, and (ii) VITC can be liable for 

violating the automatic stay. During prior interim periods, defendants filed motions to 

dismiss and the parties filed a joint status report advising the Court that they are trying 

to resolve the issues. During this Compensation Period, VITC and UPR filed a May 28 

joint status report informing the Court that the parties had agreed to participate in 

mediation to attempt to consensually resolve this case. Proskauer worked diligently to 

facilitate a resolution to this dispute during this Compensation Period, and, on June 30,

the parties filed a status report indicating that documents are being prepared to 

formalize an agreement.

• University of P.R. v. Voya Institutional Trust Co., Adv. Proc. No. 17-00217: UPR 

originally filed an action in Puerto Rico local court seeking to compel VITC, as trustee 

for UPR’s DFC Plan, to comply with the terms of the DFC Plan, including a request to 

turn over all funds in VITC’s possession to UPR. VITC removed the action to the 

United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. The arguments in this case 

are similar to those in Adv. Proc. No. 17-00216. The parties filed a joint status report 

on December 14, 2017, stating they are trying to resolve the issues. On December 15, 

2017 the case was stayed until April 13, 2018. Since April 13, 2018, VITC and UPR 

have filed two joint status reports: one on May 28, 2018, informing the Court that the 

parties had agreed to participate in mediation to attempt to consensually resolve the 

case, and another, on June 26, 2018, indicating that documents are being prepared to 

formalize an agreement. Proskauer worked diligently throughout the Compensation 

Period to drive consensus and reach a mutually agreeable resolution to the action.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 18 of 35
10

• Siemens Transp. P’ship P.R., S.E. v. P.R. Highways and Transp. Auth., Adv. Proc. 

No. 18-00030: Plaintiff Siemens filed a complaint against HTA, the Oversight Board,

AAFAF, and the GDB seeking a judgment: (i) declaring certain funds are due to 

plaintiff; (ii) declaring the funds held by the GDB are property of plaintiff; (iii) 

enjoining defendants from disbursing any of the funds to any party other than plaintiff; 

and (iv) releasing the funds to plaintiff. The action arises out of a contractual dispute 

relating to construction work provided for the benefit of HTA. Proskauer drafted and 

filed a motion to dismiss, which has been fully argued and is now sub judice.

• Puerto Rico Elec. Power Auth., et al v. Ad Hoc Group-PREPA Bondholders, et al., 

(First Circuit Court of Appeals No. 17-2079): The Ad Hoc Group of PREPA 

Bondholders, et al., holding and/or insuring approximately $5.3 billion of PREPA 

Bonds, moved the Bankruptcy Court, in the PREPA Title III action, for relief from the 

automatic stay to commence litigation against PREPA for the appointment of a 

receiver. Proskauer filed a lengthy response vehemently opposing the motion, in a 

supplement brief requested by the Court, arguing PROMESA section 305 prevents the 

Court from lifting the stay for the purpose requested by the bondholders to seek 

appointment of a receiver who would take control of PREPA’s unencumbered 

property, have all the powers of a trustee over the board, management, and employees, 

and be charged with requested rate hikes to repay all debt notwithstanding the impact 

on the Commonwealth’s recovery. The Court denied the bondholders’ motion. The 

bondholders filed an appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Proskauer has 

continued to vigorously defend the action in the First Circuit. The issues have now 

been fully briefed and oral argument was heard on June 5, 2018.

17. As part of Proskauer’s involvement in the above matters, Proskauer

(a) prepared and filed numerous pleadings and briefs in litigation matters; (b) participated in and 

prepared for hearings that included both contested and uncontested matters; (c) researched 

jurisprudence regarding proposed plan issues, including bankruptcy and U.S. Constitutional 

issues; and (d) performed a myriad of other professional services as described in this Application 

and reflected in Schedule 3 and Exhibit B.

18. By this Application, Proskauer seeks an allowance, pursuant to the Interim 

Compensation Order, of $94,488.00 as compensation for professional services rendered, 

$94,488.00 of which represents fees earned outside of Puerto Rico and $0.00 of which represents 

fees earned in Puerto Rico, and $4,277.94 as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses 

incurred during the Compensation Period in connection with such professional services. 

Notably, the Application reflects aggregate voluntary reductions made during the Compensation 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 19 of 35
11

Period to Proskauer’s request for compensation and reimbursement of expenses in the amount of 

$8,684.10 and $357.16, respectively, on top of the sizeable discount embedded in its engagement 

letter with the Oversight Board, in which it fixed hourly rates at levels providing up to 45% 

discounts on the hourly rates of its most senior partners.

19. Proskauer maintains computerized records of the time spent by all Proskauer 

attorneys and paraprofessionals in connection with the firm’s representation of the Oversight 

Board as representative of the Debtor. Subject to redaction where necessary to preserve the

Oversight Board’s attorney-client privilege and the confidentiality of attorney work product and 

mediation confidentiality, copies of the computerized records for the Compensation Period are 

attached hereto as Exhibit B.

20. Proskauer’s budget and staffing plan for the Compensation Period are attached 

hereto as Exhibit D.

5

21. Proskauer’s summary of itemized time records for professionals and 

paraprofessionals performing services for the Oversight Board is set forth on Schedule 1. 

During the Compensation Period, Proskauer billed the Oversight Board for time expended by 

attorneys based on a set rate of $759.6 The professional services performed by Proskauer on 

 5 Budgets are only provided for matters Proskauer actually billed time to in a given month. If no time was billed to 

a given matter during the month, no monthly budget has been provided for that matter.

6 In the ordinary course of business, the standard hourly billing rates for Proskauer professionals and 

paraprofessionals are adjusted annually as of the commencement of the firm’s fiscal year on November 1 to 

reflect economic and other conditions and apply to matters in and out of bankruptcy cases. Pursuant to the 

Appendix B Guidelines, “rate increases” “exclude annual ‘step increases’ historically awarded by the firm in the 

ordinary course to attorneys throughout the firm due to advancing seniority and promotion.” Appendix B 

Guidelines ¶ B.2.d, n.2. Annual step increases are awarded by Proskauer in the ordinary course throughout the 

firm on May 1. Proskauer’s November 25, 2016 engagement letter with the Oversight Board (a copy of which is 

available on the Oversight Board’s website at https://juntasupervision.pr.gov/wp-content/uploads/wpfd/50/ 

58b6126be2546.pdf) (the “Engagement Letter”) provides that Proskauer’s rates will be increased on January 1 

(rather than on November 1) by the lower of the percentage rate increase announced as of November 1 and four 

percent. Because Proskauer’s fees under the Engagement Letter are a blended rate (currently $759) for all 

attorneys and another, lower blended rate (currently $260) for all other professionals, no annual step increases will 

be applicable to the rates charged in this matter. As detailed in the Second Interim Application, Proskauer’s rates 

under the Engagement Letter increased from $730 per hour for attorneys and $250 per hour for paraprofessionals 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 20 of 35
12

behalf of the Oversight Board as representative of the Debtor during the Compensation Period 

required an aggregate expenditure of 42.90 recorded hours by Proskauer’s partners; 67.10

recorded hours by associates; 18.30 recorded hours by law clerks;7 and 24.00 recorded hours by 

paraprofessionals. As required by the Guidelines, Exhibit C attached hereto shows, for each 

Project Category (as defined below), a list of professionals who performed services in each 

Project Category and the aggregate recorded hours each professional incurred. In accordance 

with Guidelines paragraph C.3, Proskauer’s blended hourly rates are disclosed in Schedules 1

and 5. The fees charged by Proskauer, as set forth in Schedule 2, are in accordance with the 

firm’s existing billing rates and procedures in effect during the Compensation Period, as revised 

to reflect Proskauer’s arrangement with the Oversight Board. The standard rates Proskauer 

charges for the services rendered by its professionals and paraprofessionals in these Title III

cases have been reduced to reflect the unique circumstances of PROMESA and the position of 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, its instrumentalities, and its residents. Schedules 2 and 3

show that the rates Proskauer charges on an hourly basis are below the competitive, market rates 

for bankruptcy and non-bankruptcy matters charged by the other professionals representing the 

Commonwealth and statutory committees. No Proskauer rates are increased as a result of the 

geographic location of a bankruptcy case.

22. All entries itemized in Proskauer’s time records comply with the requirements set 

forth in the Guidelines, including, without limitation, (a) the utilization of project categories 

(each a “Project Category”), (b) a description of each activity or service that each individual 

performed, and (c) the number of hours (in increments of one-tenth of an hour) spent by each 

 

to $759 per hour for attorneys and $260 per hour for paraprofessionals on January 1, 2018, during the second 

interim compensation period. Rates have not increased during this Compensation Period.

7 Law clerks are incoming attorneys who have not yet been admitted or sworn into the bar. Once admitted and 

sworn into the bar, the timing of which varies on an individual- and jurisdictional-basis, such individuals are 

reclassified and billed as associates beginning on the first day of the month following such admission.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 21 of 35
13

individual providing the services. Each Project Category is organized in accordance with 

Guidelines paragraph C.8.b. If a Project Category does not appear in a particular application, 

Proskauer did not bill time or expenses for that Project Category during the Compensation 

Period, but may bill time for that Project Category in the future.

Applicant Statement In Compliance with Appendix B Guidelines C.5

23. The following answers are provided in response to the questions set forth in 

Guidelines paragraph C.5:

Question: Did you agree to any variations from, or alternatives to, your standard or 

customary billing rates, fees or terms for services pertaining to this 

engagement that were provided during the application period? If so, please 

explain.

Response: Yes. As explained in more detail in the Engagement Letter, in connection 

with its representation of the Oversight Board, both inside and outside of 

Title III, Proskauer agreed to a custom fee arrangement, whereby (a) prior 

to January 1, 2018, partners, counsel, and associates were billed at $730 

per hour, and all other staff were billed at $250 per hour, and (b) as of 

January 1, 2018, partners, counsel, and associates are billed at $759 per 

hour, and all other staff are billed at $260 per hour.

Question: If the fees sought in this fee application as compared to the fees budgeted 

for the time period covered by this fee application are higher by 10% or 

more, did you discuss the reasons for the variation with the client?

Response: The total fees sought in this fee application did not exceed total budgeted 

fees.

Question: Have any of the professionals included in this fee application varied their 

hourly rate based on the geographic location of the bankruptcy case?

Response: No.

Question: Does the fee application include time or fees related to reviewing or 

revising time records or preparing, reviewing, or revising invoices? (This 

is limited to work involved in preparing and editing billing records that 

would not be compensable outside of bankruptcy and does not include 

reasonable fees for preparing a fee application.). If so, please quantify by 

hours and fees.

Response: No, the Application does not include time or fees related to reviewing time 

records or preparing, reviewing or revising invoices in connection with the 

preparation of monthly fee statements. However, the Application does 

include time related to the preparation of monthly fee statements. 

Proskauer expended approximately 7.90 hours for a total charge of 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 22 of 35
14

approximately $5,197.70 in performing activities relating to such 

preparation, or approximately 5.5% of total fees incurred.

Question: Does this fee application include time or fees for reviewing time records to 

redact any privileged or other confidential information? If so, please 

quantify by hours and fees.

Response: No time was spent redacting time records on account of privilege concerns. 

However, the Application does include time related to reviewing time 

records to redact time entries pursuant to Court-ordered mediation 

confidentiality.

Question: If the fee application includes any rate increases since retention: (i) Did 

your client review and approve those rate increases in advance? (ii) Did 

your client agree when retaining the law firm to accept all future rate 

increases? If not, did you inform your client that they need not agree to 

modified rates or terms in order to have you continue the representation, 

consistent with ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 11-458?

Response: Yes. The Engagement Letter provides that Proskauer’s rates will be 

increased on January 1 (rather than on November 1, the beginning of 

Proskauer’s fiscal year) by the lower of the percentage rate increase 

announced as of November 1 and four percent. Proskauer’s rates with 

respect to its representation of the Oversight Board were increased by four 

percent on January 1, 2018. Rates have not increased during this 

Compensation Period.

24. Proskauer attorneys attended hearings and participated in numerous 

teleconferences with the Oversight Board, the Board’s other professional advisors, AAFAF and 

its professional advisors, the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and its professional advisors, the 

Official Committee of Retired Employees and its professional advisors, and the Debtor’s 

creditors and their professional advisors. Proskauer attorneys also participated in internal 

meetings and conferences. The Debtor’s Title III case poses complex, often interrelated issues 

that frequently require the attendance of more than one professional at hearings and conferences. 

This facilitates the sharing of information among professionals handling different but related 

work streams and possessing different areas of expertise that is brought to bear on a multitude of 

issues. Having more than one Proskauer attorney participate in hearings and conferences is often 

essential when one attorney is not handling every issue, and is beneficial to the Oversight Board 

when attendance by more than one attorney (telephonic and/or in-person) reduces the need for 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 23 of 35
15

internal de-briefing meetings and therefore allows Proskauer to represent the Debtor in a more 

cost-efficient manner that avoids unnecessary duplication and expense. Proskauer limits 

multiple participation to the most critical work streams for which attendance by more than one 

professional is actually necessary to provide efficient and appropriate representation for the 

Debtor.

Hearings and Conferences

25. Proskauer attorneys attended hearings and participated in numerous 

teleconferences with the Oversight Board, the Board’s other professional advisors, AAFAF and 

its professional advisors, the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and its professional advisors, the 

Official Committee of Retired Employees and its professional advisors, and the Debtor’s 

creditors and their professional advisors. Proskauer attorneys also participated in internal 

meetings and conferences. The Debtor’s Title III case poses complex, often interrelated issues 

that frequently require the attendance of more than one professional at hearings and conferences. 

This facilitates the sharing of information among professionals handling different but related 

work streams and possessing different areas of expertise that is brought to bear on a multitude of 

issues. Having more than one Proskauer attorney participate in hearings and conferences is often 

essential when one attorney is not handling every issue, and is beneficial to the Oversight Board 

when attendance by more than one attorney (telephonic and/or in-person) reduces the need for 

internal de-briefing meetings and therefore allows Proskauer to represent the Debtor in a more 

cost-efficient manner that avoids unnecessary duplication and expense. Proskauer limits 

multiple participation to the most critical work streams for which attendance by more than one 

professional is actually necessary to provide efficient and appropriate representation for the 

Debtor.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 24 of 35
16

Professionals Billing Fewer Than Five Hours per Month

26. The following chart indicates, solely with respect to the Debtor’s Title III case, (a) 

professionals who billed fewer than five hours per month, (b) the months for which fewer than 

five hours were billed by the professional, and (c) an explanation of why the use of such 

professional was reasonable and necessary. As a general matter, because of the size and 

complexity of the Debtor’s Title III case, it was reasonable and necessary to consult with 

professionals with specific practice area expertise to assist Proskauer’s core restructuring 

professionals in providing the Debtor with necessary and beneficial professional services.8

Professional

Month(s) in 

which less than 

5 hours were 

billed

Explanation of Why Services 

Were Reasonable and Necessary

Bienenstock, Martin J. February

Mr. Bienenstock is a partner in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who advised on a proposed 

response to the COFINA agent’s request for 

certification of issues to the Puerto Rico 

Supreme Court and related expedited 

scheduling issues.

DiGrande, Melissa February

Ms. DiGrande is an associate in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who assisted with the 

analysis of the COFINA agent’s certification 

request.

Ferrara, Ralph C. February

March

Mr. Ferrara is a partner in Proskauer’s litigation 

department who advised on SUT-related 

discovery issues. 

Firestein, Michael A. February

March

Mr. Firestein is a partner in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who advised on the

COFINA agent’s certification request.

Kim, Mee R. February

March

Ms. Kim is an associate in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who assisted with the

review and preparation of monthly fee 

statements. 

 8 Many of the professionals listed below have billed substantially more time on other matters related to Proskauer’s 

representation of the Oversight Board, including matters within and without PROMESA Title III.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 25 of 35
17

Professional

Month(s) in 

which less than 

5 hours were 

billed

Explanation of Why Services 

Were Reasonable and Necessary

Ma, Steve April

Mr. Ma is an associate in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who assisted with drafting the 

Debtor’s second interim fee application.

Miller, Tiffany

February

March

April

Ms. Miller is a paralegal in Proskauer’s labor & 

employment department who assisted with 

various administrative tasks.

Mungovan, Timothy 

W. March

Mr. Mungovan is a partner in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who advised on the 

COFINA agent’s certification request.

Petrov, Natasha February

March

Ms. Petrov is a paralegal in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who assisted with the drafting 

of Proskauer’s interim fee applications. 

Possinger, Paul V. February

March

Mr. Possinger is a partner in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who advised on the COFINA 

agent’s certification request.

Rappaport, Lary Alan February

Mr. Rappaport is a partner in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who advised on the 

COFINA agent’s certification request.

Ratner, Stephen L. February

March

Mr. Ratner is a partner in Proskauer’s litigation 

department who advised on a proposed 

response to the COFINA agent’s certification 

request.

Richman, Jonathan E. February

Mr. Richman is a partner in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who advised on a 

proposed response to the COFINA agent’s

certification request.

Rosen, Brian S. March

Mr. Rosen is a partner in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who advised on the proposed 

response to the COFINA agent’s certification 

request.

Silvestro, Lawrence 

T. March

Mr. Silvestro is a paralegal in Proskauer’s 

litigation department who assisted with various 

administrative tasks.

Stevens, Elliot R. April

Mr. Stevens is a law clerk in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who assisted with legal 

research on various issues.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 26 of 35
18

Professional

Month(s) in 

which less than 

5 hours were 

billed

Explanation of Why Services 

Were Reasonable and Necessary

Webb, Jeramy D. April

Mr. Webb is an associate in Proskauer’s 

BSGR&B group who assisted with drafting the 

Debtor’s interim fee applications.

Winkelspecht, 

Michael J.

February

March

Mr. Winkelspecht is an eDiscovery project 

manager at Proskauer who assisted with issues 

related to various document productions.

Summary Description of Professional Services

27. The following is a brief narrative summary, listed by Project Category, of the 

professional services rendered by Proskauer during the Compensation Period. Only Project 

Categories for which Proskauer billed more than 10 hours during the Compensation Period are 

summarized below.

9

I. Matter No. 33260/010 (PROMESA Title III: COFINA) and No. 33260/027 

(PROMESA Title III: COFINA (Puerto Rico Time/Expenses))

28. These matter numbers cover time spent relating to the core COFINA Title III 

case, including, for example, time spent regarding mediation, fiscal plan issues and working on 

disclosure statements or plans of adjustment.

(a) Legal Research (Project Category 202)

(Fees: $8,628.90; Hours: 23.40)

(Fees for work performed in Puerto Rico: $0.00; Hours: 0.00)

(Aggregate Fees: $8,628.90; Aggregate Hours: 23.40)

29. This Project Category includes time spent researching and analyzing legal issues 

and drafting internal memoranda and/or briefs analyzing legal issues related thereto, to the extent 

not expressly covered by another Project Category. Specifically, Proskauer attorneys and 

 9 All time spent between February 1, 2018 – March 31, 2018 has been billed to the original matter numbers, in this 

case Matter Nos 33260/010 (for fees incurred outside of Puerto Rico) and 33260/027 (for fees incurred inside 

Puerto Rico). At the request of the Fee Examiner a number of new matter numbers were implemented during the 

Compensation Period to address different contested matters and adversary proceedings in the various Title III 

cases. Use of these new matters began on April 1, 2018. Thus, time incurred between April 1, 2018 – May 31, 

2018 has been billed using these new matter numbers.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 27 of 35
19

paraprofessionals spent time researching and analyzing a variety of issues related to litigation in 

the Commonwealth-COFINA dispute.

(b) Documents Filed on Behalf of the Board (Project Category 206)

(Fees: $61,706.70; Hours: 81.30)

(Fees for work performed in Puerto Rico: $0.00; Hours: 0.00)

(Aggregate Fees: $61,706.70; Aggregate Hours: 81.30)

30. This Project Category includes time spent drafting various pleadings filed on 

behalf of the Debtor, to the extent not expressly covered by another Project Category.

Specifically, Proskauer attorneys spent time conducting research for and drafting an opposition 

to the motion by the COFINA agent to certify legal issues to the Puerto Rico Supreme Court in 

the Commonwealth-COFINA dispute.

(c) Employment and Fee Applications (Project Category 218)

(Fees: $10,231.20; Hours: 26.30)

(Fees for work performed in Puerto Rico: $0.00; Hours: 0.00)

(Aggregate Fees: $10,231.20; Aggregate Hours: 26.30)

31. This Project Category includes time spent on issues related to the compensation of 

Proskauer, and the retention and compensation of other Oversight Board professionals, including 

the preparation of monthly fee applications; (b) billing activities; and (c) the preparation of 

Proskauer monthly fee statements. Specifically, Proskauer attorneys and paraprofessionals spent 

time preparing Proskauer’s monthly fee statements and drafting its second interim fee 

application.

* * * *

32. The foregoing professional services performed by Proskauer on behalf of the 

Oversight Board as representative of the Debtor during the Compensation Period were 

reasonable, necessary, appropriate, and beneficial when rendered, facilitated the effective 

administration of the Debtor’s Title III case, and were in the best interests of the Oversight Board 

and the Debtor’s creditors, Commonwealth’s residents, and other stakeholders. Compensation 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 28 of 35
20

for the foregoing services as requested is commensurate with the complexity, importance, and 

time-sensitive nature of the problems, issues, and tasks involved. The professional services were 

performed with expedition and in an efficient manner.

33. In accordance with the factors enumerated in the Bankruptcy Code, the amount of 

fees requested is fair and reasonable given: (a) the complexity of the Debtor’s Title III case; (b) 

the time expended; (c) the nature and extent of the services rendered; (d) the value of such 

services; (e) Proskauer’s established expertise in the bankruptcy field; and (f) the costs of 

comparable services other than in a case under the Bankruptcy Code.

Actual and Necessary Expenses of Proskauer

34. Pursuant to the Guidelines, Schedule 4 is Proskauer’s summary of actual and 

necessary expenses incurred on behalf of the Oversight Board as representative of the Debtor

during the Compensation Period.

35. In accordance with paragraph C.13 of the Appendix B Guidelines and as more 

fully described in Schedule 4, Proskauer seeks reimbursement for its necessary and reasonable 

expenses, including: (a) reproduction, (b) online research, (c) delivery services and couriers, 

and (d) transcription services. All expense entries detailed in Exhibit B comply with the 

requirements set forth in the Guidelines, including an itemization of the expenses by category, 

the date the expense was incurred, and the individual incurring the expense, where available. 

The reasons for the expenses are self-explanatory; in compliance with Appendix B Guidelines,

paragraph C.13, the requested expenses are of the kind customarily charged to Proskauer’s nonbankruptcy clients and by other comparable professionals. 

36. Proskauer generally charges from $0.10 (black and white) to $0.30 (color) per 

page for photocopying expenses. The rates charged by the firm for Westlaw and Lexis 

computerized research vary according to the type of research conducted and the specific files 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 29 of 35
21

researched, but, in any event, Proskauer does not profit from the use of computer assisted legal 

research, as set forth in Schedule 4. As per the Appendix B Guidelines, Proskauer has not 

requested reimbursement of expenses related to overhead charges, such as secretarial services 

and proofreading. As Schedule 4 reflects, all expenditures are of the type customarily billed to 

clients.

37. During the Compensation Period, Proskauer has disbursed $4,277.94 as necessary 

and reasonable expenses. These charges cover Proskauer’s direct operating costs, which costs are 

not incorporated into the firm’s hourly billing rates (because to do so would impose that cost 

upon clients who do not require extensive photocopying and other facilities and services). Only 

clients who actually use services of the kind set forth in Exhibit B are separately charged for 

such services. Proskauer has made every effort to minimize its expenses in the Debtor’s Title III 

case. The actual expenses incurred in providing professional services were necessary, 

reasonable, and justified under the circumstances to effectively serve the needs of the Debtor in 

its Title III case.

Compensation Paid and Its Source

38. All services for which Proskauer seeks compensation, and expenses for which it 

seeks reimbursement, were performed on behalf of the Oversight Board as representative of the 

Debtor. In connection with the matters covered by this Application, Proskauer received no 

payment and no promises of payment for services rendered, or to be rendered, from any source 

other than the Debtor. There is no agreement or understanding between Proskauer and any other 

person, other than members of the firm, for the sharing of compensation received for services 

rendered in this Title III case.

39. PROMESA sections 316 and 317 provide for interim compensation of 

professionals and govern the Court’s award of such compensation. 48 U.S.C. §§ 2176-2177. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 30 of 35
22

PROMESA section 316 provides that a court may award a professional person employed by the 

Debtor or the Oversight Board under PROMESA “(1) reasonable compensation for actual, 

necessary services rendered by the professional person, or attorney and by any paraprofessional 

person employed by any such person; and (2) reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses.” 48 

U.S.C. § 2176(a). Section 316 also sets forth the criteria for the award of such compensation and 

reimbursement:

In determining the amount of reasonable compensation to be 

awarded ... the court shall consider the nature, the extent, and the 

value of such services, taking into account all relevant factors, 

including—

(1) the time spent on such services;

(2) the rates charged for such services;

(3) whether the services were necessary to the administration of, 

or beneficial at the time at which the service was rendered 

toward the completion of, a case under this chapter;

(4) whether the services were performed within a reasonable 

amount of time commensurate with the complexity, importance, 

and nature of the problem, issue, or task addressed;

(5) with respect to a professional person, whether the person is 

board certified or otherwise has demonstrated skill and 

experience in the bankruptcy field; and

(6) whether the compensation is reasonable based on the 

customary compensation charged by comparably skilled 

practitioners in cases other than cases under this subchapter or 

title 11.

48 U.S.C. § 2176(c).

40. As noted above, the professional services and expenditures for which Proskauer 

seeks compensation and reimbursement in this Application were necessary and beneficial to the 

Oversight Board as representative of the Debtor. Proskauer worked diligently to anticipate or 

respond to the Oversight Board’s needs and assist in the Oversight Board’s navigation of the

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 31 of 35
23

Debtor’s very complex Title III case. The compensation requested herein is reasonable in light 

of the nature, extent, and value of such services to the Oversight Board. The Oversight Board

has reviewed and approved this Application. 

Reservations

41. To the extent time or disbursement charges for services rendered or expenses 

incurred relate to the Compensation Period but were not processed prior to the preparation of this 

Application, or Proskauer has for any other reason not yet sought compensation or 

reimbursement of expenses herein with respect to any services rendered or expenses incurred 

during the Compensation Period, Proskauer reserves the right to request compensation for such 

services and reimbursement of such expenses in a future application.

Notice

42. Pursuant to the Interim Compensation Order, notice of this Application has been 

filed in the Debtor’s Title III Case and the jointly-administered Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s 

Title III case and served upon:

(a) the Financial Oversight and Management Board, 40 Washington 

Square South, Office 314A, New York, NY 10012, Attn: Professor 

Arthur J. Gonzalez, Oversight Board Member;

(b) attorneys for the Financial Oversight and Management Board as 

representative of The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, O’Neill & 

Borges LLC, 250 Muñoz Rivera Ave., Suite 800, San Juan, PR 

00918-1813, Attn: Hermann D. Bauer, Esq. (hermann.bauer@ 

oneillborges.com );

(c) attorneys for the Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory 

Authority, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, Times Square Tower, 7 Times 

Square, New York, NY 10036, Attn: John J. Rapisardi, Esq. 

(jrapisardi@omm.com), Suzzanne Uhland, Esq. (suhland@omm.com),, 

and Diana M. Perez, Esq. (dperez@omm.com);

(d) attorneys for the Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory 

Authority, Marini Pietrantoni Muniz LLC, MCS Plaza, Suite 500, 255 

Ponce de León Ave., San Juan P.R. 00917, Attn.: Luis C. MariniBiaggi, Esq., (lmarini@mpmlawpr.com) and Carolina Velaz-Rivero Esq. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 32 of 35
24

(cvelaz@mpmlawpr.com); 

(e) the Office of the United States Trustee for the District of Puerto Rico, 

Edificio Ochoa, 500 Tanca Street, Suite 301, San Juan, PR 00901 (re: 

In re: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico);

(f) attorneys for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, Paul 

Hastings LLP, 200 Park Ave., New York, NY 10166, Attn: Luc A. 

Despins, Esq. (lucdespins@paulhastings.com);

(g) attorneys for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, Casillas, 

Santiago & Torres LLC, El Caribe Office Building, 53 Palmeras 

Street, Ste. 1601, San Juan, PR 00901, Attn: Juan J. Casillas Ayala, 

Esq. (jcasillas@cstlawpr.com) and Alberto J.E. Añeses Negrón, Esq.

(aaneses@cstlawpr.com);

(h) attorneys for the Official Committee of Retired Employees, Jenner & 

Block LLP, 919 Third Ave., New York, NY 10022, Attn: Robert 

Gordon, Esq. (rgordon@jenner.com) and Richard Levin, Esq. 

(rlevin@jenner.com); and Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, 

Chicago, IL 60654, Attn: Catherine Steege, Esq. (csteege@jenner.

com) and Melissa Root, Esq. (mroot@jenner.com);

(i) attorneys for the Official Committee of Retired Employees, Bennazar, 

García & Milián, C.S.P., Edificio Union Plaza, PH-A, 416 Ave. Ponce 

de León, Hato Rey, PR 00918, Attn: A.J. Bennazar- Zequeira, Esq. 

(ajb@bennazar.org); 

(j) the Puerto Rico Department of Treasury, PO Box 9024140, San Juan, 

PR 00902-4140, Attn: Reylam Guerra Goderich, Deputy Assistant of 

Central Accounting (Reylam.Guerra@hacienda.pr.gov); Omar E. 

Rodríguez Pérez, CPA, Assistant Secretary of Central Accounting 

(Rodriguez.Omar@hacienda.pr.gov); Angel L. Pantoja Rodríguez, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Internal Revenue and Tax Policy 

(angel.pantoja@hacienda.pr.gov); Francisco Parés Alicea, Assistant 

Secretary of Internal Revenue and Tax Policy 

(francisco.pares@hacienda.pr.gov); and Francisco Peña Montañez, 

CPA, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Francisco.Pena@hacienda. 

pr.gov);

(k) attorneys for the Fee Examiner, EDGE Legal Strategies, PSC, 252 

Ponce de León Avenue, Citibank Tower, 12th Floor, San Juan, PR 

00918, Attn: Eyck O. Lugo (elugo@edgelegalpr.com); and

(l) attorneys for the Fee Examiner, Godfrey & Kahn, S.C., One East Main 

Street, Suite 500, Madison, WI 53703, Attn: Katherine Stadler 

(KStadler@ gklaw.com).

Proskauer submits that, in light of the foregoing, no other or further notice need be provided.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 33 of 35
25

WHEREFORE Proskauer respectfully requests that the Court enter an order (a) allowing 

interim compensation for professional services rendered during the Compensation Period in the 

amount of $94,488.00 (which includes the 10% professional compensation holdback amount),

$94,488.00 of which represents fees earned outside of Puerto Rico and $0.00 of which represents 

fees earned in Puerto Rico, and reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses Proskauer 

incurred in connection with such services during the Compensation Period in the amount of 

$4,277.94; (b) directing the Debtor to pay promptly to Proskauer the difference between (i) the 

amount of interim compensation for professional services rendered, and reimbursement of 

expenses incurred during the Compensation Period allowed hereunder, and (ii) the amounts for 

such compensation and expenses previously paid to Proskauer, consistent with the provisions of

the Interim Compensation Order; (c) allowing such compensation for professional services 

rendered and reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses incurred without prejudice to 

Proskauer’s right to seek additional compensation for services performed and expenses incurred 

during the Compensation Period, which were not processed at the time of this Application; and 

(d) granting Proskauer such other and further relief as is just and proper.

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank]

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 34 of 35
26

Dated: July 16, 2018

San Juan, Puerto Rico

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Martin J. Bienenstock

Martin J. Bienenstock (pro hac vice)

Paul V. Possinger (pro hac vice)

Ehud Barak (pro hac vice)

Maja Zerjal (pro hac vice)

PROSKAUER ROSE LLP

Eleven Times Square

New York, NY 10036

Tel: (212) 969-3000

Fax: (212) 969-2900

Email: mbienenstock@proskauer.com

 ppossinger@proskauer.com 

 ebarak@proskauer.com 

 mzerjal@proskauer.com 

-and-

/s/ Hermann D. Bauer

Hermann D. Bauer

USDC No. 215205

/s/ Ubaldo M. Fernández

Ubaldo M. Fernández

USDC No. 224807

O’NEILL & BORGES LLC

250 Muñoz Rivera Ave., Suite 800

San Juan, PR 00918-1813

Tel: (787) 764-8181

Fax: (787) 753-8944

Attorneys for the Financial Oversight and

Management Board as Representative of the 

Debtor

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3571 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 21:57:22 Desc: Main

Document Page 35 of 35