Miriam J. Jenkins

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
MIRIAM J. JENKINS,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 09-00844
(Chapter 7)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL
On October 26, 2009, I issued an order dismissing the
debtor’s case for failure to comply with § 109(h)’s prepetition
credit counseling requirement. 	On October 31, 2009, the debtor
filed a motion to vacate the October 26th dismissal order. 	In
the motion, the debtor argued that I should vacate my dismissal
order because the debtor filed the case in good faith, was under
threat of suits for garnishment by unsecured creditors, had
substantially completed online course prior to filing, and was
the sole provider for her family and could not secure housing
without relief from this court.
Section 109(h) does not grant the court discretion to exempt
the debtor from the requirements of § 109(h) based on a good-
faith mistake in thinking that credit counseling had already been
The document below is hereby signed.
Signed: November 20, 2009.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 09-00844 Doc 22 Filed 11/23/09 Entered 11/23/09 09:10:47 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 2

2	O:\TEEL\Garrett\Orders\Vacate\Deny motion to vacate dismiss 109(h) (Jenkins).wpd
completed. 	This is so even though the debtor will suffer the
expense of a new case when her budget is tight. 	As to the fear
of garnishments, a good faith mistake would be a basis for
extending the automatic stay in a new case under § 362(c)(3).
Any motion under that provision should be sent to creditors with
notice under LBR 9013-1 of an opportunity to oppose the motion,
and notice of a hearing date prior to the 30th day of the case
(and any date available for lift stay motions may be used for any
such motion). 	Finally, as to the need for relief in bankruptcy
to secure new housing, nothing in my prior dismissal order
prevents the debtor from refiling her case immediately and
seeking relief under the Bankruptcy Code. 	Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the debtor’s motion to vacate the order of
dismissal (Dkt. No. 21) is DENIED.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Debtor; Debtor’s Attorney; Chapter 7 Trustee; U.S.
Trustee.
Case 09-00844 Doc 22 Filed 11/23/09 Entered 11/23/09 09:10:47 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 2