ANABELLE HERNANDEZ SANTOS

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
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR
THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
IN RE:
CASE NO. 11-05567 MCF
ANABELLE 	HERNANDEZ SANTOS 	Chapter 13
XXX-XX-8043
FILED & ENTERED ON 05/03/2012
Debtor(s)
DECISION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on the following motions:
TRUSTEE'S 	OBJECTION 	TO 	CLAIM 	#10 	FILED 	BY
AMERICAN EXPRESS TRS CO. INC. (DKT #32);
ANSWER 	TO 	THE 	OBJECTION 	TO 	CLAIM 	#10 	FILED 	BY
AMERICAN EXPRESS TRS CO. INC. AND TRUSTEES SUR-
REPLY (DKTS #34 & #35);
TRUSTEE'S 	MOTION 	REQUESTING 	DEBTOR 	TO 	MODIFY
PLAN (DKT #33).
For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the proof
of claim filed by American Express on November 29, 2011 was timely
filed and allowed as a general unsecured claim.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The 	Chapter 	13 	Trustee 	objected 	to 	claim 	number 	10 	filed 	by
American 	Express 	on 	November 	29, 	2011 	because 	it 	was 	filed 	after
the 	bar 	date 	set 	by 	Fed. 	R. 	Bankr. 	P. 	3002(c). 	American 	Express
replied to the Trustee's objection to claim alleging that since the
bar date elapsed during a period in which the case was dismissed,
Case:11-05567-MCF13 Doc#:44 Filed:05/03/12 Entered:05/03/12 16:35:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 1 of 4

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
their claim was timely filed within seven days after the re-opening
of the case.
The 	debtor 	filed 	a 	bankruptcy 	petition 	under 	Chapter 	13 	on
June 30, 2011 and the bar date to file unsecured claims was set at
November 10, 2011. 	Subsequently, on October 13, 2011, the Chapter
13 Trustee's motion to dismiss on Docket No. 10 was granted and the
case 	was 	dismissed. 	The 	debtor 	filed 	a 	reconsideration 	of
dismissal, 	which 	was 	granted 	by 	the 	Court 	and 	the 	case 	was 	re-
opened 	on 	November 	22, 	2011. 	In 	other 	words, 	the 	case 	was
dismissed for forty days.
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
The 	Issue 	before 	the 	Court 	is 	as 	follows: 	How 	should 	the
dismissal, and then reinstatement, of a Chapter 13 case impact the
proof 	of 	claim 	bar 	date, 	when 	the 	bar 	date 	elapses 	during 	the
period after dismissal and prior to reinstatement?
A 	proof 	of 	claim 	which 	is 	filed 	under 	11 	U.S.C. 	§ 	501 	is
deemed 	allowed 	unless 	a 	party 	in 	interest 	objects. 	The 	time 	for
filing 	a 	claim, 	or 	the 	bar 	date, 	is 	set 	by 	Fed. 	R. 	Bankr. 	P.
3002(c) which states that in a Chapter 13 case, a proof of claim is
timely filed if it is not filed later than 90 days after the first
date 	set for the meeting of creditors under 11 U.S.C. § 341(a).
Certain untimely filed proof of claims are excepted from the
bar 	date, 	but 	these 	are 	limited 	to 	the 	six 	exceptions 	listed 	in
Rule 3002(c)(1)-(6). 	After reviewing the six exceptions, the court
finds that the facts of the instant case do not fall within any of
Case:11-05567-MCF13 Doc#:44 Filed:05/03/12 Entered:05/03/12 16:35:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 2 of 4

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
these 	six 	exceptions. 	In 	addition, 	Fed. 	R. 	Bankr. 	P. 	9006(b)(3)
limits 	the 	court's 	jurisdiction 	to 	enlarge 	the 	time 	for 	taking
action 	under 	Rule 	3002(c) 	to 	the 	extent 	and 	only 	under 	the
conditions stated by this particular rule.
However, in spite of the strict parameters of the bankruptcy
rules that unambiguously preclude any equitable discretion on the
part 	of 	the 	bankruptcy 	court 	to 	extend 	or 	toll 	the 	deadlines 	set
forth, this Court adopts the decision reached in In re Gulley, 400
B.R. 	529 	(Bankr. 	N.D.Tex. 	2009). 	The 	court 	in 	Gulley 	determined
that 	in 	cases 	where 	there 	has 	been 	extenuating 	circumstances 	of
disruption 	of 	a 	case, 	for 	example, 	a 	dismissal 	of 	the 	case 	and 	a
proof 	of 	claim 	deadline 	that 	elapses 	before 	reinstatement 	of 	the
case, the bankruptcy courts have the power to nullify the original
bar date and recalculate them. 	As stated by the court:
To 	hold 	otherwise 	offends 	notions 	of 	due
process, but also invites mischief... Th[e]
court can envision scenarios in which crafty
debtors 	may 	allow 	their 	cases 	to 	be
dismissed on technical grounds (like failure
to file paperwork), allow the proof of claim
deadline to pass, and then seek to reinstate
the case and hold a creditor to the deadline
that ran while the case was a non-case.
Id. at 538.
In 	conclusion, 	under 	our 	particular 	set 	of 	facts, 	the 	Court
determines that in all fairness to the bankruptcy process, the bar
date is recalculated to December 20, 2011. 	American Express should
not 	be 	penalized 	because 	it 	failed 	to 	file 	a 	proof 	of 	claim 	in 	a
Case:11-05567-MCF13 Doc#:44 Filed:05/03/12 Entered:05/03/12 16:35:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 3 of 4

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
dismissed case. 	At the time of dismissal, sixty two days, of the
ninety 	day 	period 	of 	the 	bar 	date, 	had 	elapsed. 	Therefore, 	upon
the reinstatement of the case, it follows that unsecured creditors
have twenty eight days to file their proof of claims, for a total
of ninety days, as was originally established.
ORDER
As 	such, 	the 	Court 	finds 	that 	the 	proof 	of 	claim 	number 	10
filed by American Express on November 29, 2011 was timely filed and
allowed as a general unsecured claim.
SO ORDERED.
San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 3rd day of May 2012.
Mildred Caban Flores
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
C: 	DEBTOR
JUAN CARLOS BIGAS VALEDON
ALEJANDRO 	OLIVERAS RIVERA
Case:11-05567-MCF13 Doc#:44 Filed:05/03/12 Entered:05/03/12 16:35:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 4 of 4