1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re

PG&E CORPORATION, 

and

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC

COMPANY,

Debtors. 

9 Affects PG&E Corporation

9 Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Co.

X Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in 

 Lead Case, No. 19-30088-DM.

_______________________________

_

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Chapter 11

Bankruptcy Case 

No. 19-30088-DM (Lead Case)

Bankruptcy Case

No. 19-30089-DM

(Jointly Administered)

ORDER AND NOTICE REGARDING JUNE 26, 2019, 9:30 AM HEARING

The court intends to begin with oral argument on the Motion to

Dismiss Adv. Proc. 19-3005.

Next it will pose a number of general questions about the

proposed proof of claim forms, instructions and the proposed order

submitted by Debtors. As to some specifics about the TCC’s “Fire

Claim Related” form and the “Wildfire Related” Debtors’ form (the

court is indifferent about which title), tentatively it favors the

addition of Question 2 in Part 1 of the TCC form; prefers the

-1-

Signed and Filed: June 25, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

June 25, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2746 Filed: 06/25/19 Entered: 06/25/19 10:55:15 Page 1 of

 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

language of Question 11 in Part 3 of the Debtors’ form over Question

9 of Part 2 of the TCC form; and in the Instructions, the TCC’s

first bullet point after “How to fill out this form” is more

informative than Debtors’. 

These questions and observations are primarily for counsel for

Debtors and the TCC, but other counsel will be invited to comment as

appropriate.

The court will next invite argument about the actual bar date

to be set. The current choices appear to be October 21, 2019, to

January 31, 2020, or somewhere in between. Debtors’ counsel needs

to explain when notices will in fact begin to be disseminated,

assuming an order is entered as soon as July 1. With a mailing

receipt deadline in New York of October 21, how many actual days

will parties have? On a related point, since there is no public

information about any plan being filed yet, does an earlier or later

bar date really make a difference? 

Conversely, how does the TCC reconcile its prior comments about

the need for haste with an extension of over three more months? 

Also, why is the TCC concerned about preventing claims objections

from being filed before a bar date?

Next the court will listen to arguments of counsel for and

against the Debtors’ notice procedures, as supplemented in its

Corrected Reply (2646) and related documents, and the TCC motion to

employ Angeion to implement its proposed procedures. The court will

not devote any time to a discussion of Prime Clerk’s achievements

and bankruptcy pedigree and its and the Debtors’ opinion of

Angeion’s failures in other matters and its alleged lack of

bankruptcy experience or qualification by any bankruptcy court

clerk. 

-2-

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2746 Filed: 06/25/19 Entered: 06/25/19 10:55:15 Page 2 of

 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The only issue to be dealt with in this regard is whether the

Debtors’ notice procedures, as supplemented, should be approved as

affording adequate due process under Mullane principles and on a

cost-effective basis. If not, should TCC’s alternative proposals and

choice of agent be chosen now or deferred because of delays in

making Angeion’s representatives available for deposition or other

considerations, such as comparative cost to the estate? The court

also needs a clear understanding of the estimated costs to the

estates of these two competing proposals.

On any of these topics the court would like to hear the views

of the United States Trustee and the General Unsecured Creditors

Committee as well as other parties.

The court will not engage in speculation about whether claims

could be or should be filed by the to-be-determined bar date based

upon fires that may occur and cause damage during the 2019 wildfire

season or any other time after January 29, 2019.

A critical issue related to the claims bar date, the

appropriate proof of claim form and the procedures to be implemented

that remains elusive to the court is the fate of the Brown/Greer

database. Counsel are invited to suggest why the court should or

should not issue an OSC. for it to be produced either for in camera

review only to begin with, or to counsel for the GUCC and the

Debtors, at least on an “eyes-only” examination, or perhaps more

broadly.

Finally, if the Protective Order motions remain unresolved,

they will be last on the agenda.

* * * END OF ORDER * * * 

-3-

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2746 Filed: 06/25/19 Entered: 06/25/19 10:55:15 Page 3 of

 3