RAFAEL L APONTE HERNANDEZ

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
IN RE: :
:
RAFAEL L. APONTE HERNANDEZ : CASE NO. 04-03877 (GAC)
:
Debtor. : CHAPTER 13
__________________________________ :
DECISION AND ORDER
On April 12, 2004, Rafael L. Aponte Hernandez (“Debtor”) filed
a voluntary petition under Chapter 13 in above-captioned case. The
Court gave notice that the claims bar date was August 25, 2004
(Docket #3). On January 14, 2005, Ford Motor Credit of Puerto Rico
(“Ford Motor”) filed an unsecured proof of claim in the amount of
$13,189.27 (Claims Register, Proof of Claim #4). On March 14,
2005, the Trustee filed an objection to proof of claim #4, alleging
that Ford Motor had failed to comply with Fed. R. Bankr. P.
3002(c), since the claim was filed after the bar date (Docket #11).
On April 1, 2005, Ford Motor filed a Reply to Trustee’s Objection
to Claim #4, arguing that it had not filed a proof of claim because
it was not properly notified of the filing of Debtor’s bankruptcy
petition (Docket #12).
Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c), creditors are granted
ninety (90) days after the first date for the meeting of creditors
to file a proof of claim. The Court notified all creditors that
the claims bar date was August 25, 2004 (Docket #3). Pursuant to
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(b)(3), the court’s discretion to enlarge the
Case:04-03877-GAC13 Doc#:14 Filed:09/07/05 Entered:09/07/05 13:27:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 1 of 3

2
time to file a proof of claim in a Chapter 13 case is limited to
conditions in Rule 3002. However, another exception has been
carved out to satisfy the requirements of due process. The Clerk
must give notice of the time allowed for the filing of a proof of
claim pursuant to Rule 3002. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(f). Due
process requires notice that is “reasonably calculated to reach all
interested parties, reasonably conveys all of the required
information, and permits a reasonable amount of time for response.”
Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co. v. Bullock (In re Robintech, Inc.),
863 F.2d 393, 396 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 110 S.Ct. 55
(1989)(citing Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S.
306, 314 (1950)).
Moreover, 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(2)(C) permits distribution of the
estate in payment of any allowed unsecured claim, proof of which is
“tardily filed under section 501(a) . . . if the creditor that
holds such claim did not have actual notice or actual knowledge of
the case in time for timely filing of a proof of claim under
section 501(a) of this title; and proof of such claim is filed in
time to permit payment of such claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(2)(C).
Since Ford Motor was not given notice of the debtor’s petition
in bankruptcy, Ford Motor could not timely file a proof of claim.
The Court concludes that after receiving notice of the petition,
Ford Motor filed its proof of claim. Moreover, the Court concludes
that disallowing Ford Motor’s claim would amount to a denial of its
Case:04-03877-GAC13 Doc#:14 Filed:09/07/05 Entered:09/07/05 13:27:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 2 of 3

3
constitutional guaranty of due process, afforded by the Fifth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Accordingly,
pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c) and 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(2)(C),
the Trustee’s objection to Ford Motor’s claim will be denied.
ORDER
WHEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that the Chapter 13 Trustee’s
Objection to Claim #4 (Docket #11), shall be, and hereby is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 7th day of September, 2005.
/s/
Gerardo A. Carlo
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
Case:04-03877-GAC13 Doc#:14 Filed:09/07/05 Entered:09/07/05 13:27:40 Desc: Main
Document Page 3 of 3