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

KELLER BENVENUTTI KIM LLP 

Jane Kim (#298192) 

(jkim@kbkllp.com) 

David A. Taylor (#247433) 

(dtaylor@kbkllp.com) 

Dara L. Silveira (#274923) 

(dsilveira@kbkllp.com) 

650 California Street, Suite 1900 

San Francisco, CA 94108 

Tel: 415 496 6723 

Fax: 650 636 9251 

Attorneys for Debtors and Reorganized Debtors 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION,

 - and - 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Bankruptcy Case No. 19-30088 (DM) 

Chapter 11 

(Lead Case) (Jointly Administered) 

REORGANIZED DEBTORS’ ONE 

HUNDRED TWENTIETH OMNIBUS 

OBJECTION TO CLAIMS (NO LIABILITY 

CLAIMS) 

Response Deadline: 

May 10, 2023, 4:00 p.m. (PT) 

Hearing Information If Timely Response Made: 

Date: May 24, 2023 

Time: 10:00 a.m. (Pacific Time) 

Place: (Tele/Videoconference Appearances Only) 

 United States Bankruptcy Court 

 Courtroom 17, 16th Floor 

 San Francisco, CA 94102 

Debtors. 

 Affects PG&E Corporation 

 Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

 Affects both Debtors 

* All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, No. 

19-30088 (DM). 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 1

of 8
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

TO: (A) THE HONORABLE DENNIS MONTALI, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY 

JUDGE; (B) THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE; (C) THE AFFECTED 

CLAIMANTS; AND (D) OTHER PARTIES ENTITLED TO NOTICE: 

PG&E Corporation (“PG&E Corp.”) and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the “Utility”), as 

debtors and reorganized debtors (collectively, the “Debtors,” or as reorganized pursuant to the Plan (as 

defined below), the “Reorganized Debtors”) in the above-captioned Chapter 11 cases (the “Chapter 

11 Cases”), hereby submit this One Hundred Twentieth Omnibus Objection (the “Objection”) to the 

claims identified in the columns headed “Claims To Be Disallowed and Expunged” on Exhibit 1 hereto 

(the “No Liability Claims”). 

I. JURISDICTION 

 This Court has jurisdiction over this Objection under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334; the Order 

Referring Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings to Bankruptcy Judges, General Order 24 (N.D. Cal.); and 

Rule 5011-1(a) of the Bankruptcy Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of California (the “Bankruptcy Local Rules”). This matter is a core proceeding pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. The 

statutory predicates for the relief requested are section 502 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the 

“Bankruptcy Code”) and Rule 3007 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy 

Rules”). 

II. BACKGROUND 

On January 29, 2019 (the “Petition Date”), the Debtors commenced with the Court voluntary 

cases under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Prior to the Effective Date (as defined below), the 

Debtors continued to operate their businesses and manage their properties as debtors in possession 

pursuant to sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee or examiner was appointed 

in either of the Chapter 11 Cases. The Chapter 11 Cases are being jointly administered for procedural 

purposes only pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). 

On July 1, 2019, the Court entered the Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 502(b)(9) and 105(a), 

Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002, 3003(c)(3), 5005, and 9007, and L.B.R. 3003-1 (I) Establishing Deadline for 

Filing Proofs of Claim, (II) Establishing the Form and Manner of Notice Thereof, and (III) Approving 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 2

of 8
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

Procedures for Providing Notice of Bar Date and Other Information to All Creditors and Potential 

Creditors [Docket No. 2806] (the “Bar Date Order”). The Bar Date Order set the deadline to file all 

proofs of claim (each, a “Proof of Claim”) in respect of any prepetition claim (as defined in section 

101(5) of the Bankruptcy Code), including all claims of Fire Claimants (as defined therein), Wildfire 

Subrogation Claimants (as defined therein), Governmental Units (as defined in section 101(27) of the 

Bankruptcy Code), and Customers, and for the avoidance of doubt, including all secured claims and 

priority claims, against either of the Debtors as October 21, 2019 at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time (the “Bar 

Date”). The Bar Date Order also approved a special form of Proof of Claim for Fire Claimants, defined 

therein as the “Fire Victim Proof of Claim Form.” The Bar Date later was extended solely with respect 

to unfiled, non-governmental Fire Claimants to December 31, 2019 [Docket No. 4672].1 

By Order dated June 20, 2020 [Dkt. No. 8053], the Bankruptcy Court confirmed the Debtors’ 

and Shareholder Proponents’ Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization Dated June 19, 2020 (as may be 

further modified, amended or supplemented from time to time, and together with any exhibits or 

scheduled thereto, the “Plan”). The Effective Date of the Plan occurred on July 1, 2020. See Dkt. No. 

8252. 

Sections 4.7 and 4.26 of the Plan provide that any Fire Victim Claim2 shall be “permanently 

channeled to the Fire Victim Trust, and such Claim shall be asserted exclusively against the Fire Victim 

Trust . . . .” Certain of the No Liability Claims were filed on Fire Victim Proof of Claim Forms and/or 

asserted Fire-related damage and were thus preliminarily identified as Fire Victim Claims to be 

administered, processed, settled, disallowed, resolved, liquidated, satisfied, and/or paid by the Fire 

Victim Trust in accordance with its governing documents. However, based on further review of these 

No Liability Claims, other information provided by the claimants, and the Reorganized Debtors’ books 

and records, the Fire Victim Trustee and the Reorganized Debtors jointly determined that the No 

Liability Claims did not arise from one of the specific Fires defined in Section 1.86 of the Plan and thus 

1

 The Fire Victim Claims will be administered through the Fire Victim Trust and the Subrogation 

Wildfire Claims through the Subrogation Wildfire Trust in accordance with the Plan. 

2

 Capitalized terms used in this Section II but not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed 

to them in the Plan. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 3

of 8
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

do not constitute Fire Victim Claims under Section 1.79 of the Plan. Instead, they are general unsecured 

claims against the Reorganized Debtors, subject to all of the Reorganized Debtors’ legal and equitable 

rights with respect thereto.3

III. RELIEF REQUESTED 

The Reorganized Debtors file this Objection pursuant to section 502 of the Bankruptcy Code, 

Bankruptcy Local Rule 3007-1, and the Order Approving (A) Procedures for Filing Omnibus Objections

to Claims and (B) the Form and Manner of the Notice of Omnibus Objections, dated June 30, 2020 

[Docket No. 8228] (the “Omnibus Objections Procedures Order”) seeking entry of an order 

disallowing and expunging the No Liability Claims. 

IV. ARGUMENT 

A. The No Liability Claims Should be Disallowed and Expunged 

The Omnibus Objections Procedures Order and Bankruptcy Rule 3007(d) permit the 

Reorganized Debtors to file objections to more than one Proof of Claim if, among other reasons, “[t]he 

claims seek recovery of amounts for which the Debtors are not liable.” Omnibus Objections Procedures 

Order, ¶2(C)(iii). In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3007(e), each of the Claimants on Exhibit 1 is 

listed alphabetically, and the claim number and amount are identified. Furthermore, in accordance with 

the Omnibus Objections Procedures Order, the Reorganized Debtors have sent individualized notices to 

the holders of the No Liability Claims. 

The No Liability Claims are identified on Exhibit 1, in the columns headed “Claims To Be 

Disallowed and Expunged.” Exhibit 1 also specifically identifies in the “Basis for Objection” that the 

No Liability Claims are classified as one or more of the following: 

1. Barred by Statute of Limitations. These Proofs of Claim fail to state a legal basis for 

recovery against the Reorganized Debtors because the underlying causes of action are barred by the 

applicable statute of limitations (the “Barred by Statute of Limitations Claims”). All of the Barred by 

3

 On March 29, 2023, the Fire Victim Trustee notified the affected Claimants that the Fire Victim 

Trustee and the Reorganized Debtors had determined that their Claims were not Fire Victim Claims, as 

defined in Section 1.79 of the Plan, and instead were general unsecured claims against the Reorganized 

Debtors, subject to all claims, rights, defenses to, or setoffs or recoupments against such claim that 

may be available at law or in equity to the Reorganized Debtors. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 4

of 8
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

Statute of Limitations Claims are governed by California law. Pursuant to section 350 of the California 

Code of Civil Procedure, an action is commenced when a complaint is filed. An action for injury to real 

or personal property must be commenced within three years, Cal. Code Civ. P. § 338(b)-(c), and actions 

for personal injury and wrongful death, respectively, must be commenced within two years. Id. at 

§§ 335.1 and 377.60. An action for relief on the ground of fraud has a three-year statute of limitations. 

Id. at § 338(d). Finally, any action upon a liability created by statute also must be brought within three 

years. Id. at § 338(a). 

The Barred by Statute of Limitations Claims seek damages for injury to property or person,4 fraud, 

or statutory violations.5 However, in all cases the dates of the incidents alleged were more than three 

years before the Petition Date. Claimants did not commence any actions within the limitations period. 

Accordingly, under the applicable California statutes of limitations, the Claimants’ right to bring each of 

the Barred by Statute of Limitations Claims against the Reorganized Debtors expired prior to the Petition 

Date. Therefore, the Reorganized Debtors are not liable for the Barred by Statute of Limitations Claims, 

and they should be disallowed and expunged. 

2. Amended and Superseded. The Reorganized Debtors seek to disallow and expunge Claim 

No. 59027 (the Amended and Superseded Claim”), filed on October 17, 2019 by Manuel Cord JiminezPadgett. Claim No. 106627 (the “Surviving Claim”), also filed by Mr. Jiminez-Padgett on October 29, 

4

 The other categories of damages (e.g. business loss, agricultural loss, economic and noneconomic 

damages) indicated on the Fire Victim Proof of Claim Form are all derivative of property damage 

and/or personal injury and are subject to the same statutes of limitations. 

5

 Claim No. 72390, filed by Synergy Project Management, Inc., seeks damages arising from alleged 

fraud and statutory violations by PG&E relating to 2015 gas strikes in the course of excavation and 

utilities work in San Francisco. Under either theory, the statute of limitations ran in 2018. Synergy 

argues that its claim is not time-barred because the cause of action did not accrue until Synergy 

discovered the alleged fraud in December 2018. However, to invoke this discovery rule, a plaintiff 

must plead facts showing “(1) the time and manner of discovery and (2) the inability to have made 

earlier discovery despite reasonable diligence.” Hopkins v. Dow Corning Corp., 33 F.3d 1116, 1120 

(9th Cir. 1994). In other words, plaintiff must affirmatively excuse its failure to discover the fraud 

within three years by showing that it had not been negligent in failing to make the discovery sooner nor 

had it had actual or presumptive knowledge of facts sufficient to put it on inquiry. Bedolla v. Logan & 

Frazer 52 Cal. App. 3d 118, 129 (1975). Synergy fails to satisfy this requirement because it does not 

make any showing, let alone a credible one, excusing its delay.

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 5

of 8
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

2020 in the same amount, states on its face that it amends the Amended and Superseded Claim. 

Accordingly, the Reorganized Debtors are not liable for the Amended and Superseded Claim. The 

Objection does not affect the Surviving Claim, which was settled on March 24, 2021. 

3. Rule 2. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Tariff Electric Rule 2 (“Rule 2”) sets forth the 

general contours of the voltage provided to consumers. Rule 2(E) states that customers are responsible 

for furnishing, installing, inspecting, and keeping in good and safe condition, at their own risk and 

expense, all protective devices required to protect customers’ property. Rule 2(E) further provides that 

“PG&E shall not be responsible for any loss or damage occasioned or caused by the negligence, or 

wrongful act of the applicant or of any of his agents, employees or licensees in omitting, installing, 

maintaining, using, operating or interfering with any such protective devices.” The Reorganized Debtors 

seek to disallow and expunge one No Liability Claim that asserts amounts for damages caused to 

electronics (the “Rule 2 Claim”) by a power surge. The Reorganized Debtors are not liable for such 

damages under Rule 2, and therefore the Rule 2 Claim should be disallowed and expunged. 

4. No Liability Based on Investigation. These are Proofs of Claim for which the Reorganized 

Debtors conducted a thorough review and concluded that there was no basis for liability. The 

Reorganized Debtors’ review of each Proof of Claim consisted of (i) analysis of their books and records 

and any information submitted in connection with the Proofs of Claim, and (ii) investigation of the facts 

alleged by the Claimant. In each instance, the Reorganized Debtors discovered no basis for the Claim 

and therefore determined that it was not valid. Furthermore, all but one6 of these Claimants filed claims 

with PG&E’s Law Claims Department in advance of the Petition Date. These claims were denied on the 

basis that PG&E was not liable for the alleged harm.7

6

 Claim No. 2306, filed by David Mitchell, relates to alleged injuries incurred by Claimant on January 

25, 2018. Mr. Mitchell did not contact PG&E prior to filing his Proof of Claim on April 15, 2019. 

However, on January 24, 2020, he filed a complaint against PG&E in the Superior Court of California, 

Kern County (the “State Court Action”), in violation of the automatic stay. On April 27, 2021, 

PG&E filed a Notice of Effective Date of Chapter 11 Plan and Imposition of Plan Injunction in the 

State Court Action. 

7

 Two of these Proofs of Claim, Nos. 2676 and 8599, both filed by or on behalf of “Hedger Rameriz,” 

are substantively identical to Claim No. 8584, filed by “Hedgar Ramirez.” Claim No. 8584 was 

disallowed and expunged pursuant to the Order Disallowing and Expunging Proofs of Claim Pursuant 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 6

of 8
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

B. The Claimants Bear the Burden of Proof 

A proof of claim is “deemed allowed, unless a party in interest . . . objects.” 11 U.S.C. § 502(a).8 

Section 502(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, however, provides in relevant part that a claim may not be 

allowed if “such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any 

agreement or applicable law.” 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1). Once the objector raises “facts tending to defeat 

the claim by probative force equal to that of the allegations of the proofs of claim themselves,” Wright 

v. Holm (In re Holm), 931 F.2d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 1991), quoting 3 L. King, Collier on Bankruptcy 

§ 502.02 at 502-22 (15th ed. 1991), then “the burden reverts to the claimant to prove the validity of the 

claim by a preponderance of the evidence.” Ashford v. Consolidated Pioneer Mortgage (In re 

Consolidated Pioneer Mortgage), 178 B.R. 222, 226 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1995) (quoting In re Allegheny 

Int’l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 173-74 (3d Cir. 1992)), aff’d without opinion 91 F.3d 151 (9th Cir. 1996). 

“[T]he ultimate burden of persuasion is always on the claimant.” Holm, 931 F.2d at 623 (quoting King, 

Collier on Bankruptcy); see also Lundell v. Anchor Constr. Specialists, Inc., 223 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th 

Cir. 2000); Spencer v. Pugh (In re Pugh), 157 B.R. 898, 901 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1993); In re Fidelity 

Holding Co., 837 F.2d 696, 698 (5th Cir. 1988). 

As discussed above, the Reorganized Debtors submit that the No Liability Claims should be 

disallowed and expunged because the Reorganized Debtors are not liable for the amounts requested 

therein. If not disallowed and expunged, No Liability Claims potentially could allow the applicable 

Claimants to receive recoveries to which they are not entitled. 

 

to Reorganized Debtors’ Fortieth Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Liability / Passthrough Claims)

[Docket No. 9866] on the basis that the damage alleged had not been caused by PG&E. 

8

 On December 15, 2022, the Court entered the Order Further Extending Deadline for the Reorganized 

Debtors to Object to Claims and Granting Related Relief [Docket No. 13363], which extended the 

Reorganized Debtors’ deadline under Section 7.1 of the Plan to bring objections to Claims through and 

including June 20, 2023. As set forth in the Order on the RKS Claimants’ Motion to Enforce the ADR 

Procedures Order [Docket No. 13612], the Reorganized Debtors’ forthcoming request for a further 

extension of this deadline will be heard on June 7, 2023. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 7

of 8
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

VI. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 

The Reorganized Debtors hereby reserve the right to object, as applicable, in the future to any of 

the Proofs of Claim listed in this Objection on any ground, and to amend, modify, or supplement this 

Objection to the extent an objection to a claim is not granted, and to file other objections to any proofs 

of claims filed in these cases, including, without limitation, objections as to the amounts asserted therein, 

or any other claims (filed or not) against the Debtors, regardless of whether such claims are subject to 

this Objection. A separate notice and hearing will be scheduled for any such objections. Should the 

grounds of objection specified herein be overruled, wholly or in part, the Reorganized Debtors reserve 

the right to object to the No Liability Claims on any other grounds that the Reorganized Debtors may 

discover or deem appropriate. 

VII. NOTICE 

Notice of this Objection will be provided to (i) holders of the No Liability Claims; (ii) the Office 

of the U.S. Trustee for Region 17 (Attn: Andrew R. Vara, Esq. and Timothy Laffredi, Esq.); (iii) all 

counsel and parties receiving electronic notice through the Court’s electronic case filing system; and 

(iv) those persons who have formally appeared in these Chapter 11 Cases and requested service pursuant 

to Bankruptcy Rule 2002. The Reorganized Debtors respectfully submit that no further notice is 

required. No previous request for the relief sought herein has been made by the Reorganized Debtors to 

this or any other Court. 

WHEREFORE the Reorganized Debtors respectfully request entry of an order granting the relief 

requested herein and such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate. 

Dated: April 14, 2023 KELLER BENVENUTTI KIM LLP 

By: /s/ Dara L. Silveira Dara L. Silveira 

Attorneys for Debtors and Reorganized Debtors 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13670 Filed: 04/14/23 Entered: 04/14/23 09:22:46 Page 8

of 8