1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

In re: Case No. 20-20259-RAM 

 (Jointly Administered) 

It’Sugar FL I LLC, et al., 

 Chapter 11 

 Debtors. 

_______________________________/

DEBTORS’ MOTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1121(d) OF THE BANKRUPTCY 

CODE FOR AN EXTENSION OF EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO FILE A PLAN 

OF REORGANIZATION AND TO SOLICIT ACCEPTANCES 

Hearing requested on January 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. along with other matters already set 

It’Sugar FL I LLC, It’Sugar LLC, It’Sugar Atlantic City LLC, and It’Sugar FLGC LLC 

(“Debtors”), pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1121(d), seek the entry of an order granting the Debtors 

sixty (60) day extensions of their exclusive right to file a plan of reorganization and to solicit 

acceptances, thereby (a) extending the time during which the Debtors shall have the exclusive 

right to file a plan of reorganization from January 20, 2021 through and including March 23, 

2021; and (b) extending the time during which the Debtors shall have the exclusive right to 

solicit acceptances thereto for such plan from March 22, 2021 through and including May 21, 

2021. 

I. JURISDICTION 

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 

1334. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A). 

2. Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 1 of 14
   

2

3. The statutory predicates for the relief requested herein are section 1121(d) of 

chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) and Rule 9006 of the 

Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”). 

II. BACKGROUND

4. On September 22, 2020 (the “Petition Date”), the Debtors filed voluntary 

petitions under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. 

5. The Debtors operate as an integrated enterprise and are known throughout the 

industry as It'Sugar. It'Sugar is a specialty candy retailer whose products include bulk candy, 

candy in giant packaging, and licensed and novelty items. It'Sugar’s portfolio includes 

approximately 100 retail locations across 28 states. 

6. The Debtors are operating their businesses and managing their affairs as debtors 

in possession pursuant to section 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee or 

examiner has been sought or appointed. 

III. BAR DATES FOR FILING CLAIMS

7. Pursuant to the “Notice of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case, Meeting of Creditors & 

Deadlines” dated September 23, 2020 (the “Bar Date Notice”), the general bar date for entities 

to file proofs of claim was December 1, 2020 (the “General Bar Date”). 

8. In addition, the Bar Date Notice set a deadline of March 22, 2021 for 

governmental units to file proofs of claim (the “Governmental Bar Date” and together with the 

General Bar Date, the “Bar Dates”). 

9. The Governmental Bar Date falls almost two months after the current deadline of 

January 20, 2021 for the Debtors to file a proposed plan. 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 2 of 14
   

3

IV. RELIEF REQUESTED

10. The Debtors request that, pursuant to section 1121(d) of the Bankruptcy Code, 

the Court enter an order extending the Debtors’ exclusive deadline to file a plan of 

reorganization and solicit acceptances, without prejudice to the right of the Debtors to seek 

further extensions of such periods, as follows: 

a) extending the time during which the Debtors shall have the exclusive right 

to file a plan of reorganization from January 20, 2021 through and including March 23, 

2021; and 

b) extending the time during which the Debtors shall have the exclusive right 

to solicit acceptances to said plan from March 22, 2021 through and including May 21, 

2021. 

V. BASIS FOR RELIEF REQUESTED

11. Section 1121 of the Bankruptcy Code is the statutory predicate for determining 

the time period within which only the debtor in possession may file a plan of reorganization and 

solicit acceptances thereto. Pursuant to § 1121(b), a debtor is given the exclusive right to file a 

plan of reorganization until the expiration of one hundred-twenty (120) days following the date 

of the order for relief (the “Exclusivity Period”), unless the Exclusivity Period is extended by 

order of the Bankruptcy Court. In addition, § 1121(c)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a 

debtor in possession is given the exclusive right to solicit acceptances of its plan for one 

hundred-eighty (180) days following the date of the order for relief (the “Acceptance Period”), 

unless the Acceptance Period is extended by order of the Bankruptcy Court. 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 3 of 14
   

4

12. Pursuant to § 1121(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, upon the request of a party in 

interest and after notice and a hearing, this Court may, for cause shown, lengthen the Exclusivity 

Period and the Acceptance Period. Section 1121(d)(1) states, in pertinent part: 

...on request of a party in interest made within the respective 

period specified in subsections (b) and (c) of this section and after 

notice and a hearing, the court may for cause ... increase the 120-

day period or the 180-day period referred to in this section. 

11 U.S.C. § 1121(d)(1). 

13. The term “cause” is undefined in the Bankruptcy Code. However, the legislative 

history indicates it is intended to be a flexible standard to balance the competing interests of a 

debtor and its creditors. See In re McLean Indus., 87 B.R. 830, 833 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1987) 

(citing H.R. Rep. No. 595, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 231 (1978), reprinted in U.S.C.C.A.N. 1978, pp. 

5963, 6190) (noting that Congress intended to give bankruptcy courts flexibility to protect a 

debtor’s interests by allowing unimpeded opportunity to negotiate settlement of debts without 

interference from other parties in interest). As will be shown below, the Debtors have 

demonstrated sufficient cause to extend the Exclusivity Period to March 23, 2021 and the 

Acceptance Period to May 21, 2021. 

14. In determining whether cause exists to extend the exclusive periods, courts 

generally consider a variety of factors to assess the facts and circumstances of each case. See In 

re Adelphia Commc’ns Corp., 352 B.R. 578, 587 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006) (stating that the 

decision to extend or terminate exclusivity for cause is within the discretion of the bankruptcy 

court, and is fact specific); McLean Indus., 87 B.R. at 834 (identifying the factors used by courts 

to determine whether cause exists to extend exclusivity); In re Dow Corning Corp., 208 B.R. 

661, 664, 670 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1997); In re Express One Int’l, Inc., 194 B.R. 98, 100 (Bankr. 

E.D. Tex. 1996). The factors cited by courts include, without limitation: 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 4 of 14
   

5

(a) the size and complexity of the debtor’s case; 

(b) the fact that the debtor is paying its bills as they come due; 

(c) the existence of good-faith progress towards reorganization; 

(d) the existence of an unresolved contingency; and 

(e) a finding that the debtor is not seeking to extend exclusivity to pressure 

creditors “to accede to [the debtors’] reorganization demands.”

 

See, e.g., In re Borders Group, Inc., 460 B.R. 818, 822 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011) (citing factors 

and granting debtor’s motion to extend exclusive periods by 120 days); Express One Int’l, 194 

B.R. at 100 (citing In re Grant Traverse Development Co., Ltd., 147 B.R. 418 (Bankr. W.D. 

Mich. 1992) (citing factors and granting debtor’s third request that extended exclusivity for one 

year); McLean Indus., 87 B.R. at 834 (citing factors and approving second, 90-day extension 

request of debtor that had few creditors and where the case had been pending for less than a 

year); see also In re Adelphia Comm. Corp., 352 B.R. 578, 586 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citing 

factors and denying motion to terminate exclusivity); Under all of these factors, cause exists to 

extend the Exclusivity Period to March 23, 2021 and the Acceptance Period to May 21, 2021. 

15. The most common basis upon which courts grant an extension of the exclusivity 

periods is the size and complexity of the chapter 11 case. See, e.g., Express One Int’l, 194 B.R. at 

100. Here, the magnitude of these chapter 11 cases satisfies the first factor courts look to when 

deciding whether sufficient cause exists for granting an extension of the Exclusivity Period and 

Acceptance Period. These cases are complex, involving four Debtors with operations spanning 

various states in the United States with hundreds of creditors and thousands of customers. As of 

the Petition Date, the Debtors also employed approximately 600 employees. 

16. In order for the Debtors to provide adequate information regarding expected 

distributions to creditors in the disclosure statement, the Debtors submit that it is necessary to 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 5 of 14
   

6

extend the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period to provide the Debtors sufficient time to 

review and analyze the filed claims. Given the number of legal and business issues facing the 

Debtors in this reorganization due to the size, nature, and national scope of the Debtors’ 

business, it is clear that the Debtors’ cases are complex. 

17. Second, cause may be shown to extend the exclusivity periods where the debtor is 

paying its debts as they become due. See, e.g., In re Service Merchandise Co., 256 B.R. 744, 751 

(Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 2000); In re Crescent Manufacturing, 122 B.R. 979, 982 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 

1990); McLean Indus., Inc., 87 B.R. at 834. The Debtors submit that they are paying their 

postpetition obligations in a timely fashion. The Debtors have been managing their business 

effectively and preserving the value of their assets for the benefit of all creditors. Accordingly, 

the Debtors submit that cause exists to extend the Exclusivity Period to March 23, 2021 and the 

Acceptance Period to May 21, 2021. 

18. Third, the Debtors have made good faith progress towards their reorganization. 

The Debtors are in meaningful discussions and negotiations with many landlords regarding lease 

modifications which will greatly enhance the Debtors’ reorganization efforts. The Debtors need 

additional time to continue and finalize these negotiations as part of the plan process. 

19. A court may grant an extension of exclusivity where the case has been pending 

for a relatively brief period of time. Here, the Debtors’ bankruptcy cases are a little over three 

months old. In addition, it is worth noting, in other cases of equal or lesser size and complexity 

in this District, courts have routinely granted similar extensions on the debtor’s initial request for 

an extension of the exclusive periods. See, e.g., In re Viva Investments Limited Liability 

Company, Case No. 15-11753-PGH (Bankr. S.D. Fla. June 10, 2015) (court grants initial request 

to extend debtors’ exclusive period to file a plan and disclosure statement by 90 days); In re 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 6 of 14
   

7

Florida Gaming Centers, Inc., Case No. 13-29597-RAM (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Dec. 16, 2013) (court 

grants initial request to extend debtors’ exclusivity period to file a plan and disclosure statement 

by 120 days); In re Meadows of Jupiter Florida Condo, LLC et al., Case No. 10-43458-PGH 

(Bankr. S.D. Fla. May 18, 2011) (court grants request to extend exclusivity period to file a plan 

and disclosure statement by an additional 90 days); and In re Gulfstream International Group, 

Inc., et al., Case NO. 10-44131-JKO (Bankr. S.D. Fla. March 22, 2011) (court grants request to 

extend exclusive periods for an additional 120 days); In re LP Watch Group, Inc., et al., Case 

No. 10-29919-JKO (Bankr. S.D. Fla. December 3, 2010) (initial exclusivity periods extended by 

90 days); and In re Arch Aluminum & Glass Co, Inc., et al., Case No. 09-36232-JKO (Bankr. 

S.D. Fla. April 19, 2010) (court grants request to extend exclusive periods for 180 days). 

Accordingly, the Debtors submit that cause exists to extend the Exclusivity Period through and 

including March 23, 2021 and the Acceptance Period through and including May 21, 2021. 

20. The Debtors are not seeking to extend the Exclusivity Period and the Acceptance 

Period in order to pressure their creditors into accepting a plan that they may find unacceptable, 

and no party in interest will be prejudiced by the relief requested herein. This is the Debtors’ first 

request for an extension of the exclusive periods. The requested extension is reasonable given the 

Debtors’ progress to date and the current posture of these chapter 11 cases. The Debtors are not 

seeking this extension to delay the reorganization for some speculative event. Rather, the 

proposed extensions of the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period will advance the Debtors’ 

efforts to confirm a reorganization plan as expeditiously as possible and bring these cases to a 

resolution. 

21. The Debtors have behaved in a manner consistent with their fiduciary obligations 

to their creditor constituencies, evidencing proper motive in seeking extensions of the 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 7 of 14
   

8

Exclusivity Period and the Acceptance Period. Instead of prejudicing any party in interest, the 

requested extension will afford the Debtors an opportunity to propose a realistic and viable 

chapter 11 plan. 

22. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that the Debtors and their estates would be 

prejudiced if the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period are allowed to expire. The 

negotiations of possible lease modifications to include in the plan likely are and will continue to 

be time consuming and complex. Termination of exclusivity and the possibility of the filing of 

third-party plans will only make the effort for a consensual plan of reorganization more difficult. 

23. The Debtors submit that they have acted in good faith during these chapter 11 

cases and believe that they have a realistic chance of confirming a plan of reorganization. The 

requested extension of the Exclusivity Period and the Acceptance Period is not unduly 

burdensome or prejudicial to any parties in interest in these cases. Accordingly, the Debtors 

request a 60-day extension of the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period. 

24. Extending the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period will not harm or 

prejudice the Debtors’ creditors or other parties in interest. Rather, an extension of the exclusive 

periods will increase the likelihood of a greater distribution to the Debtors’ stakeholders by 

facilitating an orderly, efficient and cost-effective plan process for the benefit of all creditors. 

Termination of the Exclusivity Period and Acceptance Period, on the other hand, could give rise 

to the threat of multiple plans and a contentious confirmation process, resulting in increased 

administrative expenses and consequently diminishing returns to the Debtors’ creditors. 

Moreover, it could significantly delay, if not completely undermine, the Debtors’ ability to 

confirm any plan in these cases. In an abundance of caution, and in a balance of the equities, the 

Debtors respectfully request that cause exists for the entry of an order extending the Exclusivity 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 8 of 14
   

9

Period and Acceptance Period for a period of 60 days each, through March 23, 2021 and May 21, 

2021, respectively. 

 WHEREFORE, the Debtors respectfully request the entry of an Order, extending the 

exclusive period within which the Debtors may file a plan through and including March 23, 2021 

pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1121(d)(1), and the corresponding solicitation period through and 

including May 21, 2021, as well as granting any further relief which the Court deems just and 

proper. 

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 

 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 9 of 14
   

10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that, on December 22, 2020, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing was served via the Court's Notice of Electronic Filing upon the Registered Users set 

forth on the attached Exhibit 1 and via U.S. Mail upon the parties listed on the Manual Notice

List. A copy will be served by mail along with the Notice of Hearing once docketed and a 

certificate of service will be filed. 

 s/ Joshua W. Dobin 

Joshua W. Dobin, Esquire 

Florida Bar No. 93696 

jdobin@melandbudwick.com

Meaghan E. Murphy, Esquire 

Florida Bar No. 102770 

mmurphy@melandbudwick.com 

MELAND BUDWICK, P.A. 

3200 Southeast Financial Center 

200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Ste 3200 

Miami, Florida 33131 

Telephone: (305) 358-6363 

Telecopy: (305) 358-1221 

Attorneys for Debtors in Possession 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 10 of 14
EXHIBIT 1 

Electronic Mail Notice List

The following is the list of parties who are currently on the list to receive email notice/service 

for this case. 

 Joaquin J Alemany joaquin.alemany@hklaw.com, jose.casal@hklaw.com 

 Scott Andron sandron@broward.org, swulfekuhle@broward.org 

 Joseph H Baldiga bankrupt@mirickoconnell.com 

 Brian S Behar bsb@bgglaw.net 

 David M Blau dblau@clarkhill.com 

 Michael S Budwick mbudwick@melandbudwick.com, 

ltannenbaum@melandbudwick.com;mrbnefs@yahoo.com;mbudwick@ecf.courtdrive.co

m;ltannenbaum@ecf.courtdrive.com;phornia@ecf.courtdrive.com 

 David S Catuogno david.catuogno@klgates.com, caitlin.conklin@klgates.com 

 Andrew S Conway aconway@taubman.com 

 Ryan E Davis rdavis@whww.com, 

thiggens@whww.com;thiggens@ecf.courtdrive.com 

 Joshua W Dobin jdobin@melandbudwick.com, 

ltannenbaum@melandbudwick.com;mrbnefs@yahoo.com;ltannenbaum@ecf.courtdrive.c

om;jdobin@ecf.courtdrive.com;ltannenbaum@ecf.courtdrive.com;phornia@ecf.courtdriv

e.com 

 Daniel M Eliades Daniel.eliades@klgates.com, caitlin.conklin@klgates.com 

 Kate Foley kfoley@mirickoconnell.com 

 Robert C Furr ltitus@furrcohen.com, 

atty_furrcohen@bluestylus.com;cworkinger@furrcohen.com;staff1@furrcohen.com 

 Daniel Gielchinsky dan@dyglaw.com 

 Ronald E Gold rgold@fbtlaw.com, eseverini@fbtlaw.com;khardison@fbtlaw.com 

 Eric S. Golden egolden@burr.com, jmorgan@burr.com 

 Ilyse M. Homer ihomer@bergersingerman.com, 

efile@bergersingerman.com;mdiaz@bergersingerman.com;efile@ecf.inforuptcy.com 

 Jeannie Kim jekim@sheppardmullin.com, dgatmen@sheppardmullin.com 

 Ian J Kukoff ian.kukoff@blaxgray.com, 

kukoff.assistant@blaxgray.com;isabel.colleran@blaxgray.com 

 David Kupetz dkupetz@sulmeyerlaw.com 

 Robert L LeHane kdwbankruptcydepartment@kelleydrye.com 

 Ilan Markus imarkus@barclaydamon.com, docketing@barclaydamon.com 

 Orfelia M Mayor ecf@mayorbankruptcy.com, 

mayor.orfeliar100728@notify.bestcase.com 

 James C. Moon jmoon@melandbudwick.com, 

ltannenbaum@melandbudwick.com;mrbnefs@yahoo.com;jmoon@ecf.courtdrive.com;lta

nnenbaum@ecf.courtdrive.com;phornia@ecf.courtdrive.com 

 Kevin S Neiman kevin@ksnpc.com 

 Office of the US Trustee USTPRegion21.MM.ECF@usdoj.gov 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 11 of 14
 Chad S Paiva trustee.paiva@gmail.com, 

michaelbollingpa@gmail.com,sramirez.fbp@gmail.com 

 Kristen N Pate bk@brookfieldpropertiesretail.com 

 Hampton Peterson legalservices@PBCTax.com 

 Michael S Provenzale michael.provenzale@lowndes-law.com, anne.fisher@lowndeslaw.com 

 Heather L. Ries hries@foxrothschild.com, ralbert@foxrothschild.com 

 Grace E. Robson grobson@mrthlaw.com, 

mrthbkc@gmail.com,lgener@mrthlaw.com,grobson@ecf.courtdrive.com

 Javier A Roldan Cora javier.roldancora@klgates.com 

 Steven D Schneiderman Steven.D.Schneiderman@usdoj.gov 

 Eric J Silver esilver@stearnsweaver.com, 

rross@stearnsweaver.com;larrazola@stearnsweaver.com;cgraver@stearnsweaver.com;m

fernandez@stearnsweaver.com;Atty_arrazola@bluestylus.com 

 Louis G Spencer louis@alexanderricks.com, dana@alexanderricks.com 

 Ronald M Tucker rtucker@simon.com, 

cmartin@simon.com;bankruptcy@simon.com 

 Michael S Waskiewicz mwaskiewicz@burr.com, sguest@burr.com 

 Gillian D Williston gillian.williston@troutman.com, 

fslecfintake@troutman.com;ethan.ostroff@troutman.com;richard.hagerty@troutman.com

;carter.nichols@troutman.com 

Manual Notice List

Ricki S. Friedman

1 Huckleberry Lane 

Hewlett Harbor, NY 11557 

Steven W. Golden

Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP 

780 Third Avenue 

34th Floor 

New York, NY 10017-2024 

Leslie C. Heilman

Ballard Spahr LLP 

919 North Market Street, 11th Floor 

Wilmington, DE 19801-3034 

Michael R. Herz

Fox Rothschild LLP 

49 Market Street 

Morristown, NJ 07960 

Indianola Pecan House Inc

PO Box 367 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 12 of 14
Indianola, MS 38751 

Paul J. Labov

Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP 

780 Third Avenue 

34th Floor 

New York, NY 10017-2024 

Robert LeHane

Kelly Drye & Warren LLP 

101 Park Avenue, 29th Floor 

New York, NY 10178 

Miami-Dade County Tax Collector

Peter K. Cam, Tax Collector 

c/o Alexis Gonzalez 

200 NW 2nd Avenue, Suite 430 

Miami, FL 33128 

Minnesota Department of Revenue

POB 64447-BKY 

St Paul, MN 55164-0447 

NEST International, Inc.

Donald K Ludman, Esq 

6 North Broad Street #100 

Woodbury, NJ 08096 

Ernie Zachary Park

13215 E Penn St #510 

Whittier, CA 90602 

Playvisions Inc

19180- 144th Ave NE 

Woodinville, WA 98072 

Laurel D. Roglen

Ballard Spahr LLP 

919 North Market Street, 11th Floor 

Wilmington, DE 19801-3034 

Bradford J. Sandler

Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP 

780 Third Avenue 

34th Floor 

New York, NY 10017-2024 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 13 of 14
Bradsford J. Sandler

Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP 

919 North Market Street 

17th Floor 

Wilmington, DE 19801 

Stribbons

2921 W Cypress Creek Rd #101 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309 

Troy Taylor

c/o Algon Group 

2457 Collins Ave PH 2 

Miami Beach, FL 33140 

Tokidoki LLC

5655 W Adams Blvd 

Los Angeles, CA 90016 

Michael J. Viscount

Fox Rothschild LLP 

1301 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 400 

Atlantic City, NJ 08401-7212 

Sean T. Wilson

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP 

101 Park Avenue, 27th Floor 

New York, NY 10178 

Hayley R. Winograd

Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP 

780 Third Avenue 

34th Floor 

New York, NY 10017-2024 

Case 20-20259-RAM Doc 206 Filed 12/22/20 Page 14 of 14