Kevin Parker

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
KEVIN DONNELL PARKER,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 08-00278
(Chapter 13)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER SUSTAINING LANDLORD’S
OBJECTION TO DEBTOR’S SECTION 362(l)(1) CERTIFICATION
On April 25, 2008, the debtor filed a voluntary petition
under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. 	The debtor’s petition
acknowledges that the debtor’s landlord, United Dominion Realty
Trust (“United Dominion”), has a prepetition judgment for
possession of the debtor’s residence, and the landlord has filed
an objection to the debtor’s attempt to certify that he has a
right to cure the default that gave rise to the prepetition
judgment for possession under 11 U.S.C. § 362(l)(1) (Docket Entry
(“DE”) No. 15, filed May 1, 2008).
Section 362(b)(22) of 11 U.S.C. provides that the filing of
a petition “does not operate as a stay –-“
subject to subsection (l), under subsection (a)(3), of
the continuation of any eviction, unlawful detainer
The order below is hereby signed.
Signed: May 01, 2008.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 08-00278 Doc 16 Filed 05/02/08 Entered 05/02/08 09:53:55 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 5

2
action, or similar proceeding by a lessor against a
debtor involving residential property in which the
debtor resides as a tenant under a lease or rental
agreement and with respect to which the lessor has
obtained before the date of the filing of the
bankruptcy petition, a judgment for possession of such
property against the debtor . . . .
Section 362(l), to which § 362(b)(22) is made subject, provides
the debtor with an opportunity to mitigate or avoid the harsh
results of § 362(b)(22). 	Pursuant to § 362(l)(1), if the debtor
files and serves upon the lessor a certification under penalty of
perjury that, (1) under nonbankruptcy law, circumstances exist
under which the debtor would be permitted to cure the monetary
default that gave rise to the judgment for possession, and (2)
that the debtor has deposited with the clerk any rent that would
become due during the 30-day period after the filing of the
bankruptcy petition, § 362(b)(22) will not apply until 30 days
after the date of the filing of the petition. 	Pursuant to §
362(l)(2), § 362(b)(22) will not apply at all if, in addition to
complying with subsection (l)(1), within 30 days after the filing
of the petition the debtor files and serves upon the lessor a
further certification under penalty of perjury that the debtor
has cured the entire monetary default that gave rise to the
judgment, and the lessor does not successfully object to any of
the debtor’s certifications. 	Finally, § 362(l)(4) provides that
if the debtor indicates on the petition that there was a judgment
for possession of the residential rental property in which the
Case 08-00278 Doc 16 Filed 05/02/08 Entered 05/02/08 09:53:55 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 5

3
debtor resides and does not file a certification under paragraph
(1) or (2):
(A) subsection (b)(22) shall apply immediately
upon failure to file such certification, and relief
from the stay provided under subsection (a)(3) shall
not be required to enable the lessor to complete the
process to recover full possession of the property; and
(B) the clerk of the court shall immediately serve
upon the lessor and the debtor a certified copy of the
docket indicating the absence of a filed certification
and the applicability of the exception to the stay
under subsection (b)(22).
In the instant case, the debtor made only a partial certification
under § 362(l)(1), to wit, he certified that his landlord, United
Dominion, has a prepetition judgment for possession of his
residence and that under nonbankruptcy law there are
circumstances under which the debtor would be permitted to cure
the entire monetary default that gave rise to the judgment for
possession. 	The debtor failed, however, to certify that he
included with his petition the deposit of any rent that would
become due during the 30-day period after the filing of the
petition. 	The court’s records further reflect that no deposit
was made.
Having failed to certify that the necessary deposit was
made, and having failed to actually make such a deposit, the
court concludes that the debtor did not make a certification of
the type contemplated under § 362(l)(1). 	Accordingly, §
362(l)(4)(A) applies and the court finds that § 362(b)(22)
Case 08-00278 Doc 16 Filed 05/02/08 Entered 05/02/08 09:53:55 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 5

1 	The clerk’s office previously arrived at the same
conclusion and made the following entry, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §
362(l)(4)(B), on the docket on April 28, 2008:
Clerk's Office Notifies Parties in Interest that on the
Voluntary Petition the Debtor States that the Landlord
has a Judgement Against the Debtor for Possession of
Debtor's Residence. In Accordance with USC 362(l)4B,
the Debtor did Not Provide, (1) a Certification of
Intent to Cure Monetary Default for Residential
Property and, (2) the 30 Day Rent Deposit.
The clerk’s office also entered a notice of the issuance of a
certified copy of the docket (DE No. 11, entered April 28, 2008),
but it remains unclear whether United Dominion was actually
served with a copy as it should have been pursuant to §
362(l)(4). 	Regardless, the court deems it appropriate to clarify
by way of this memorandum decision and order that because the
debtor’s attempted § 362(l)(1) certification was materially
deficient, it was insufficient to trigger the protections of §
362(l)(1).
4
applied immediately upon the filing of this case “and relief from
the stay provided under subsection (a)(3) shall not be required
to enable the lessor to complete the process to recover full
possession of the property.” 1
United Dominion’s objection was filed under § 362(l)(3)(A),
which permits the lessor to file an objection to any debtor
certification under § 362(l)(1) or (2), and calls for the court
to hold a hearing within 10 days after the filing and service of
such objection “to determine if the certification filed by the
debtor under paragraph (1) or (2) is true.” 	No such hearing is
necessary because the objection to the debtor’s certification
does not dispute its veracity; rather, the debtor has altogether
failed to make the necessary certification regarding the required
Case 08-00278 Doc 16 Filed 05/02/08 Entered 05/02/08 09:53:55 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 5

5	O:\Laura\ORDERS\Rent Deposit Orders\Order - landlord objection to 362(l) certification _ Parker.wpd
deposit. 	Accordingly, there is no disputed certification for the
court to address at a hearing. 	It is thus
ORDERED that United Dominion’s objection to the debtor’s
certification under § 362(l)(1) (DE No. 15) is sustained without
the necessity of a hearing. 	It is further
ORDERED that pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(22), the
automatic stay imposed by 11 U.S.C. § 362 shall not apply to
prevent the debtor’s landlord, United Dominion Realty Trust, from
enforcing its prepetition judgment for possession of the debtor’s
residence.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Debtor; Chapter 13 Trustee; Stephen Nichols
Case 08-00278 Doc 16 Filed 05/02/08 Entered 05/02/08 09:53:55 Desc Main
Document Page 5 of 5