In re Singh

Good Law
2016 WL 3452776·2016 Bankr. LEXIS 2357·553 B.R. 404
United States Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 21, 2016Case No. 10-28544-E-13California3,037 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sargis, J.

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION AND DECISION DENYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER

The court’s findings of facts and conclusions of. law are: (1) stated orally on the record at the June 14, 2016 hearing on this Motion; (2) in this Supplemental Memorandum Opinion and Decision; and (3) in the Memorandum Opinion and Decision (Dckt. 238) of the court for Raj Singh’s prior motion to vacate, which is incorporated herein in its entirety by this reference.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Raj Singh filed a “Request to Reopen the Bankruptcy and for Other Relief’ on May 26, 2016 (“Present Motion”). Dckt. 234. Raj Singh failed to properly notice and set the matter for hearing. The court issued an order setting the Motion for hearing for 3:00 p.m. on June 14, 2016. Dckt. 241. The Motion seeks to have the court vacate its order which requires that Raj Singh obtain prior authorization, during a specified eight-year period, from the chief bankruptcy judge in the district where he desires to file another bankruptcy case. Order, Dckt. 182 (“Prefiling Review Order”).

The Present Motion states that because Raj Singh “may need to file a bankruptcy on an emergency basis,” the court should: (1)modify or set aside the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.