EXHIBIT E

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 1

of 11
Pages 1 - 30 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

Before The Honorable James Donato, Judge 

IN RE: PG&E CORPORATION and 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, 

APPEARANCES: 

Debtors. NO. 19-05257 JD 

San Francisco, California 

Monday, October 28, 2019 

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 

For Creditor Committee Official Committee of Tort Claimants: 

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 

Levi's Plaza 

1160 Battery Street East - Suite 100 

San Francisco, California 94111 

BY: KIMBERLY S. MORRIS, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

For Ad Hoc Group of Subrogation Claim Holders: 

WILLKIE, FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 

878 Seventh Avenue 

New York, New York 10019 

BY: BENJAMIN P. MCCALLEN, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

For JCCP Plaintiffs: 

SKIKOS, CRAWFORD, SKIKOS & JOSEPH, LLP 

One Sansome Street - Suite 2830 

San Francisco, California 94104 

BY: STEVEN J. SKIKOS, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

{APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE) 

REPORTED BY: Marla F. Knox, RPR, CRR 

Official Reporter 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 2

of 11
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 

APPEARANCES: (CONTINUED) 

For 4000-Plus Fire Creditors: 

COREY, LUZAICH, DE GHETALDI & RIDDLE LLP 

700 El Camino Real 

P. 0. Box 669 

Millbrae, California 94030 

BY: AMANDA L. RIDDLE, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

For Creditor Committee Official Committee of Unsecured 

Creditors: 

For Fire Victims: 

MILBANK, TWEED, HADLEY & MCCLOY LLP 

1850 K Street, N.W. Suite 100 

Washington, D.C. 20006 

BY: ANDREW LEBLANC, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

WALKUP, MELODIA, KELLY & SCHOENBERGER PC 

650 California Street - 26th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94108 

BY: KHALDOUN BAGHDAD I, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

For Ad Hoc Bondholder Committee: 

AKIN, GUMP, STRAUSS, HAUER 

& FELD LLP 

580 California Street 

San Francisco, California 94104 

BY: ASHLEY VINSON CRAWFORD, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

2 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 3

of 11
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 

APPEARANCES: (CONTINUED) 

For Debtor-in-Possession PG&E Corporation: 

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP 

825 Eighth Avenue 

New York, New York 10019 

BY: KEVIN ORSINI, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

TIMOTHY G. CAMERON, ATTORNEY AT LAW 

3 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 4

of 11
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 

Monday - October 28, 2019 1:00 p.m. 

P R O C E E D I N G S 

---oOo---

THE CLERK: Calling Civil 19-5257, In Re: PG&E 

Corporation and Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 

Counsel, please state your appearances for the record. 

MS. MORRIS: Kimberly Morris --

THE CLERK: Please come forward to the microphones, 

thank you. 

MS. MORRIS: Kimberly Morris of Baker Hostetler on 

behalf of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants. 

MR. McCALLEN: Good afternoon, Your Honor, Benjamin 

Mccallen, Willkie Farr & Gallagher on behalf of the Ad Hoc 

Subrogation Group. 

MR. BAGHDADI: Good afternoon, Your Honor, Khaldoun 

Baghdadi, co-liaison counsel in the State court JCCP 

proceedings. And with me in court is also Mr. Steven Skikos, 

also co-liaison in the same proceedings. 

MR. ORSINI: Good afternoon, Your Honor, Kevin Orsini, 

Cravath, Swaine & Moore, on behalf of debtors. Also here with 

me is my partner, Tim Cameron, who will handle a significant 

portion of the argument today. 

THE COURT: I'm sorry. 

MR. ORSINI: He will handle a significant portion of 

the discussion today. I just have some preliminary remarks and 

4 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 5

of 11
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 

then I will cede the podium. 

THE COURT: Well, let's see. Who is going to 

represent the Plaintiffs' side? 

MS. MORRIS: I will, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: Ms. Morris, okay. All right. Go ahead. 

MR. ORSINI: So, Your Honor, I thought just at the 

outset -- and then I will cede the podium -- I just wanted to 

give the Court an update on a couple of the issues we discussed 

when we were here last week, where we stand with respect to 

claims coming in and the Bar Date because I do think it is 

relevant to the question of sampling. 

We have been pleased to see that there has been a 

significant increase as we have processing -- been processing 

the claims above the participation rates that we were initially 

seeing. 

Just to give the Court a sense as to where we are right 

now, as of October 21st, which was the Bar Date, there were 

approximately 45,000 claims related to the wildfires that have 

been processed by the vendor who is taking all these in under 

the Bankruptcy Court order. There is approximately 20- to 

25,000 claims that were submitted in paper that are still being 

processed. So we don't quite know what is in those yet. We 

just know they exist. So our expectation is we will wind up 

with somewhere in the range of 70,000 to 80,000 wildfire 

claims. Now, that --

5 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 6

of 11
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 

THE COURT: Well, that sounds good but out of how 

many --

MR. ORSINI: Well, that begs the question, right, what 

percentage participation is that? And there are different ways 

to look at that because -- as I think Mr. Singleton was noting 

when he was here last week there are some duplicates. There 

are also circumstances where -- let's say that I had owned a 

piece of property in the Town of Paradise, and I had a house 

that burned down and I lived there with my wife and my child, 

in some instances we will have three claims associated with 

that piece of property. 

So I think what all sides have been undertaking including 

to prepare for estimation is to try and make heads or tails of 

what we actually have in terms of participation. One way to 

look at it is to try to map all of the claims that have come in 

to pieces of property that have structures that Cal Fire 

identified as being damaged or destroyed during the fires. 

We still have 25,000 claims to process, but what we have 

seen so far -- and these are rough numbers because it is a 

rough analysis but what we have seen so far is there appear 

in the Camp Fire, for example, to be claims associated with 

roughly 70 percent of the addresses that Cal Fire identified as 

having a damaged or destroyed property. 

Now, I expect that number will go up as we process the 

rest of the claims. I don't know by how much. Another way to 

6 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 7

of 11
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 

look at it is people. We have done an analysis of how many --

THE COURT: That's just for the Camp Fire? 

MR. ORSINI: That was for Camp. For Tubbs we are 

seeing numbers that are roughly in the same range. For the 

non-Tubbs North Bay fires it can fluctuate based on the 

individual fire from a low of roughly SO percent to one I think 

is closer to 80 percent. 

In terms of people, we looked at the Town of Paradise by 

way of example. Prior to the fires, the census count was 

roughly 26,000 residents. Our rough analysis so far -- and we 

still haven't processed those claims I talked about -- so far 

we see claims by roughly 20,000 people who say they lived in 

the Town of Paradise prior to the Camp Fire. So high 

70 percent. 

With all that in mind, we do agree with the Court that we 

would like as many Claimants who have valid claims in their 

mind to submit claims in time. So we considered the issue 

further. We notified the TCC this morning that we are amenable 

to an extension of the Bar Date by two months to bring it from 

October 21st to December 20th, which I think is the Friday. We 

considered going longer. 

The reason, candidly, we stuck with December 20th as a 

proposal is we think that will already challenge our ability to 

incorporate all of the data into the estimation process given 

our schedule, but we have a lot of professionals. We can make 

7 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 8

of 11
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 

it happen. Our concern is if you push it out too much further 

than that, it will challenge our ability for the experts to get 

that processed in time so that it can be included in rebuttal 

reports, in depositions, so each side has an opportunity to 

consider that. 

Of course, if claims come in after December 20th Bar 

Date just like if claims have come in since October 21st 

we will consider those, and I can represent to the Court that 

from the Debtors' perspective, we will be very open to allowing 

those untimely claims. We don't intend to use the Bar Date 

and --

THE COURT: Let me just pause. So, Ms. Morris, 12/20, 

does that sound better? Is everybody happy with that on 

Plaintiffs' side? 

MS. MORRIS: Your Honor, we just received this 

position of the Debtors just before this hearing today. And so 

we are still processing it internally. We are happy to hear 

that they are open to some extension, but we will discuss it on 

our side; and I believe we are meeting and conferring on this 

right after this hearing today. 

MR. ORSINI: Including to work out the logistics, Your 

Honor. 

THE COURT: It is good news, right? 

MS. MORRIS: Yes, it is good news that they are 

agreeing to an extension. Our Bar Date motion had sought two 

8 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 9

of 11
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 

alternative dates for a Bar Date, and I think we are going to 

discuss all of the issues including --

THE COURT: Which dates did you propose? 

MS. MORRIS: I believe the date was an alternative 

date was the December 20th date, which they have agreed to, and 

I believe the first date that we had asked for was a January 

date; but I would have to go back and look at that. 

THE COURT: And there -- if you two agree, then 

bankruptcy court is not going to have a problem with that as 

far as you know. 

MR. ORSINI: We wouldn't expect the Court would have a 

problem with that. That is part of the reason we will meet and 

confer. We have a motion that is calendared up for a hearing 

in mid-November, I believe; but hopefully we can stipulate to 

this. 

THE COURT: It sounds like at a minimum it would be 

December 20th. You all may ask for something longer. I take 

it your next date is down the road from December 20th. But 

that's good news. Okay. I'm happy to hear that. I hope the 

percentage rate is as high as 70 as a base and will only go up. 

Time will tell. 

I understand, Mr. Orsini, what you are saying; but I think 

we ought to be able to do 90 percent or more. That should be 

realistic in a case like this. So I hope we get to that point, 

and I think the extension of the deadline is going to help with 

9 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 10

of 11
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 

that. 

Now, what about the new fires? What are we thinking about 

in terms of estimation impact, Ms. Morris? 

MR. ORSINI: So with respect to --

THE COURT: Let me start with Ms. Morris. 

MS. MORRIS: Your Honor, the treatment of the claims 

that have arisen in connection with the Kincade and the other 

fires from this weekend, claims that have already arisen or 

that may arise in connection with those fires, their treatment 

of the bankruptcy process, we need to confer with the various 

constituents in the bankruptcy on that; the debtors, the UCC, 

all the constituents in the case. And so we intend to do that 

and report back to Your Honor as to its effect on estimation 

after we have had a chance to do that. 

THE COURT: But the more -- the baseline proposition 

is that -- are you going to ask for that to be included in the 

estimation? 

MS. MORRIS: I think there are a number of issues that 

affect the bankruptcy case as a whole. We are not prepared to 

address that issue today. It is under consideration, and we 

will address it with all the parties and then come back to 

Your Honor when we are prepared to address it after we have a 

chance to consider it. 

THE COURT: Mr. Orsini? 

MR. ORSINI: We too are in the process of assessing 

10 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4630-5 Filed: 11/08/19 Entered: 11/08/19 15:41:24 Page 11

of 11