{2332/000/00496752} 1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION 

In re: 

Advanced Power Technologies, LLC, Case No. 20-13304-PGH 

 

 Debtor. Chapter 11 

________________________________/ 

EXPEDITED MOTION TO RECONSIDER DISMISSAL ORDER 

AND TO REINSTATE THIS CHAPTER 11 CASE 

** Expedited Hearing Requested Pursuant to Local Rule 9075-1 **

Basis for Expedited Relief

On April 24, 2020, the Court dismissed this chapter 11 case to 

permit the Debtor to apply for a substantial forgivable loan 

(approximately $1.8 million) pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, 

Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Thereafter, the 

Debtor applied for and received said forgivable loan. However,

since the dismissal, the Debtor has received too many inquiries

and demands from creditors, including threats to replevy assets. 

The Debtor cannot operate without the benefit of the automatic 

stay and going through the chapter 11 plan process. 

Accordingly, the Debtor requests that the Court schedule this 

motion for hearing on an expedited basis on or before Friday, 

May 8, 2020. 

Advanced Power Technologies, LLC (the “Debtor”), by and through its undersigned 

counsel and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59, made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9023, and Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 60(b), made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024, requests that the Court reconsider the 

Order Granting Emergency Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Case and Shorten Hearing Notice 

Period [ECF No. 60] (the “Dismissal Order”) and reinstate this chapter 11 case. In support, the 

Debtor respectfully states as follows: 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 1 of 6
{2332/000/00496752} 2

Background 

1. The Debtor is a Florida limited liability company with its corporate office located 

in Pompano Beach, Florida. The Debtor provides consumers with complete solutions for lighting, 

signage, and electrical service. 

2. On March 11, 2020, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 

11 of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Petition Date”). The Debtor was operating its business and 

managing its affairs as a debtor in possession. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committee had 

been appointed. The section 341 meeting of creditors was held and concluded on April 16, 2020. 

3. On April 22, 2020, the Debtor filed the Amended Emergency Motion to Voluntarily 

Dismiss Case and Shorten Hearing Notice Period [ECF No. 52], wherein the Debtor sought the 

immediate dismissal of this chapter 11 case in order to access significant forgivable credit under 

the CARES Act in order to fund payroll. 

4. On April 24, 2020, after notice and a hearing, the Court entered the Dismissal 

Order, wherein the Court, among other things, dismissed this chapter 11 case without prejudice 

and denied all pending motions without prejudice as moot. 

5. Following entry of the Dismissal Order, the Debtor applied for and obtained a 

forgivable loan under the CARES Act in the approximate amount of $1.8 million. 

6. Nonetheless, following entry of the Dismissal Order, the Debtor has received too 

many inquiries and demands from creditors, including threats to replevy assets. The Debtor 

realizes that it cannot operate without the benefit of the automatic stay and going through the 

chapter 11 plan process. 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 2 of 6
{2332/000/00496752} 3

Relief Requested and Legal Basis in Support 

7. Through this motion, the Debtor requests that the Court reconsider the Dismissal 

Order and reinstate this chapter 11 case. 

8. A motion for reconsideration may be considered under either Rule 59, made 

applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9023, or Rule 60(b), made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024. 

9. A motion to alter or amend an order or judgment under Rule 59 must be filed no 

later than 14 days after entry of the subject order or judgment. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9023. A 

motion seeking relief from a judgment or order under Rule 60(b) must be filed within a reasonable 

time after entry of the subject judgment or order. See Rule 60(c)(1). This motion is timely filed 

under both Rule 59 and Rule 60. 

10. Under Rule 59, a court may grant a motion to alter or amend an order or judgment 

if the movant presents: (1) newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of trial, or 

(2) evidence in the record that clearly establishes manifest error of law or fact. Kellogg v. Schreiber 

(In re Kellogg), 197 F.3d 1116, 1119 (11th Cir. 1999) (citing In re Investors Fla. Aggressive 

Growth Fund, Ltd., 168 B.R. 760, 768 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1994)). Under Rule 60(b)(2) and (6), a 

court may relieve a party from a judgment or order for “newly discovered evidence” or “any other 

reason that justifies relief.” 

11. The Debtor submits that circumstances exist that justify the Court to reconsider the 

Dismissal Order and reinstate this chapter 11 case. At the time the Debtor sought to voluntarily 

dismiss this case in order to obtain a forgivable loan under the CARES Act, the Debtor was 

complying with the loan application promulgated by the U.S. Small Business Administration (the 

“SBA”), which required an applicant to certify that it was not presently a debtor in bankruptcy. If 

the applicant were a debtor in bankruptcy, the application stated that the loan would not be 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 3 of 6
{2332/000/00496752} 4

approved. Since then, numerous bankruptcy courts have entered temporary restraining orders 

compelling the SBA to act on the loan applications without regard for an applicant’s status as a 

chapter 11 debtor in possession. Calais Regional Hospital v. Jovita Carranza (In re Calais 

Regional Hospital), Adv. Proc. No. 20-01006, ECF No. 21 (Bankr. D. Maine May 1, 2020); Roman 

Catholic Church of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe v. U.S. (In re Roman Catholic Church of the 

Archdiocese of Santa Fe), Adv. Proc. No. 20-01026, ECF No. 15 (Bankr. D.N.M. May 1, 2020); 

Hidalgo County Emergency Service Foundation v. Carranza (In re Hidalgo County Emergency 

Service Foundation), Adv. Proc. No. 20-02006, ECF No. 18 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. April 25, 2020). 

The bankruptcy court’s reason that the SBA exceeded its authority in requiring the abovedescribed certification and that it is in violation of 11 U.S.C. § 525(a). The ruling in In re Roman 

Catholic Church of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe went so far as to state that “[i]f the [SBA’s] actions 

result in [the debtor] not obtaining the $900,000 it requested, [the debtor] may file an adversary 

proceeding for compensatory and, if appropriate, punitive damages.” 

12. Accordingly, the Debtor should not have been required to voluntarily dismiss this 

case in order to obtain forgivable loans under the CARES Act when it otherwise met all other 

requirements to obtain said loan. The circumstances created by the SBA permit the Court to grant 

the relief requested herein. 

13. Further, at the time the Debtor sought to voluntarily dismiss this case, the Debtor 

believed that its creditors would work with the Debtor to restructure its debt outside of bankruptcy. 

Though some creditors have cooperated, others have not, and the Debtor is unable to restructure 

its debt outside of bankruptcy without the cooperation of all creditors. 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 4 of 6
{2332/000/00496752} 5

14. Obtaining a forgivable loan under the CARES Act was in the best interests of the 

Debtor’s estate and did not unfairly prejudice any parties in interest. Indeed, obtaining the 

forgivable loan significantly benefitted the Debtor and its creditors. 

15. Reconsideration of the Dismissal Order or reinstatement of this chapter 11 case 

shall neither negate nor adversely affect any of those rights and interests given to TBK Bank, SSB 

(“TBK”), under and in respect to the Court’s Final Financing Order and the Post-Petition 

Agreements [ECF No. 45]; including, but not limited to, all senior and first priority post-petition 

liens and security interests granted to TBK, and the Debtor’s prepetition and post-petition 

monetary and non-monetary obligations to TBK shall remain in full force and effect postdismissal. In accordance herewith, TBK shall be entitled to continue collecting directly from any 

account debtors all payments made on any accounts. 

WHEREFORE, the Debtor respectfully requests that the Court hold an expedited hearing 

on this motion and thereafter enter an order reinstating this chapter 11 case and granting any further 

relief as the Court deems just and equitable. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

SHRAIBERG, LANDAU & PAGE, P.A. 

Attorneys for the Debtor 

2385 NW Executive Center Drive, Suite 300 

Boca Raton, Florida 33431 

Telephone: 561-443-0800 

Facsimile: 561-998-0047 

Email: bss@slp.law 

 Email: jlanphear@slp.law 

By: /s/ Bradley S. Shraiberg 

 Bradley S. Shraiberg 

 Florida Bar No. 121622 

 Joshua B. Lanphear 

 Florida Bar No. 125421 

 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 5 of 6
{2332/000/00496752} 6

ATTORNEY CERTIFICATION 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am admitted to the Bar of the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Florida and I am in compliance with the additional qualifications to 

practice in this Court set forth in Local Rule 2090-1(A). 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished via 

Notice of Electronic Filing to those parties registered to receive electronic notices in this case on 

May 5, 2020. 

 By: /s/ Bradley S. Shraiberg 

Case 20-13304-PGH Doc 64 Filed 05/05/20 Page 6 of 6