Open navigation menu
Close suggestions
Search
Search
en
Change Language
Upload
Sign in
Sign in
Download free for days
0 ratings
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
205 views
30 pages
101829
Platiff's request for immediate status conference CJ-2017-3496
Uploaded by
Joshua Clark
AI-enhanced title
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content,
claim it here
.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
Download
Save
Save 1045435902-20191106-101829- For Later
Share
0%
0% found this document useful, undefined
0%
, undefined
Print
Embed
Report
0 ratings
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
205 views
30 pages
101829
Platiff's request for immediate status conference CJ-2017-3496
Uploaded by
Joshua Clark
AI-enhanced title
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content,
claim it here
.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
Carousel Previous
Carousel Next
Download
Save
Save 1045435902-20191106-101829- For Later
Share
0%
0% found this document useful, undefined
0%
, undefined
Print
Embed
Report
Download
Save 1045435902-20191106-101829- For Later
You are on page 1
/ 30
Search
Fullscreen
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA Nov 6 2019 RICK WARREN OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC., COURT CLERK Plaintiff, v. Case No. CJ-2017-3496 JOSHUA DECKER, ASHWIN NAMBAKAM, Judge Natalie Mai BRAD ARMSTRONG, TIM MUELLER, and LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendants. PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE STATUS CONFERENCE Plaintiff Oil States Industries, Inc. (“Oil States”), respectfully requests this Court set an im- ‘mediate status conference to address several issues that have arisen since the parties were last be- fore the Court. After 5:00 p.m. on August 28, Defendants Decker, Nambakam, and Legacy Valve ‘Systems filed bankruptcy proceedings, which triggered a stay ofthis case under the automatic stay provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 362. The automatic stay has now been lifted as to this case, clearing the ‘way for further proceedings, including the trial scheduled for December 9, 2019. However, several issues must be addressed as soon as possible so the parties can prepare for future proceedings most efficiently and effectively. Oil States suggests an immediate status conference would be appropri- ate to address at least the following subjects. Sanctions for Defendants? Litigation Misconduct. On April 10, 2019, this Court entered an. order sanctioning Defendants for destruction of evidence and other discovery abuses. See Journal Entry entered Apr. 10, 2019, attached as Exhibit A. This order followed a hearing on February 22, 2019, in which the Court characterized Defendants? misconduct as “the most egregious abuse of the legal system yet that I've seen in both my time on the bench as well as time having litigated for nine years prior.” Feb, 19, 2019 Hearing Transcript at 5:23-6:1, attached as Exhibit B. The Courtstopped just short of entering default judgment against Defendants, but warned that if Defendants failed to comply fully with discovery compelled with the same order, the Court would reconsider centering default judgment. Journal Entry, Exhibit A, at 3. Defendants’ failed to provide the com- pelled discovery in response to multiple opportunities extended by Oil States. As a result, Oil States filed its Second Motion for Sanctions on May 24, 2019. ‘This Court held a hearing on Oil States’ Second Motion for Sanctions on August 20, 2019. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court ordered Defendants to produce numerous specified items by 5:00 p.m. on August 28, 2019. See Minute Order entered Aug. 20, 2019, attached as Exhibit C. During the hearing, the Court warmed Defendants’ that failure to comply would result in default judgment on liability, leaving only the issue of damages. “So I will let you know that unless some- thing really major comes up to hold up production, if these things are not produced in a timely manner this time, I will grant that request for default and then we would just have the damage issue to talk about.” Aug. 20, 2019 Hearing Transcript at 53:17-21, attached as Exhibit D. The Court contemplated a status conference to be held September 13, 2019, to assess Defendants’ compliance with the Court’s order. Defendants made no attempt to comply with the Court’s August 20 order.’ They failed to produce a single item ordered by the Court. Instead, after the 5:00 p.m. deadline on August 28, Defendants filed their bankruptcy petitions. Notice of Legacy Bankruptcy Filing (filed 5:11 p.m.); Notice of Decker Bankruptcy Filing (filed 5:24 p.m.); Notice of Nambakam Bankruptcy Filing (filed 5:28 p.m.), attached as Exhibit E. Defendants’ bankruptcy filings automatically stayed this, case under 11 U.S.C. § 362. Consequently, no status conference was held on September 13, and Oil States was unable to advise the Court of Defendants? failure to produce a single piece of . The Court ordered Defendants to produce Legacy’s accounting database to the Court for i camera review. Oil States sees no evidence that Legacy complied with that order, and assumes that Legacy did not do so.information as ordered. Oil States has now obtained relief from the stay. See Orders entered Oct. 21, 2019, attached as Exhibit F.? Itis now time to address Defendants’ repeated contempt forthe litigation process and impose appropriate further sanctions. As part of the process for determining those sanctions, Defendants request the opportunity to present additional information to the Court that has come to light since the August 20, 2019 hearing. For instance, Oil States has discovered a bank account held by Legacy that Defendants had not previously disclosed. And, Decker and Legacy have asserted in the bank- ruptcy proceedings that the financial statements Legacy previously produced in this case are false. Logistics for Issues to be Tried. No matter what sanctions the Court imposes for Defend- ants’ litigation misconduct, further judicial proceedings will be necessary. At a minimum, if default judgment is entered as a sanction, the Court must conduct a hearing to determine actual and puni- tive damages. See e.g., Payne v. Dewitt, 1999 OK 93, 995 P.2d 1088 (affirming trial court decision to conduct bench hearing on damages following entry of default es discovery sanction). Oil States respectfully suggests that an immediate status conference would be helpful to identify how and when any remaining issues will be tried. Reestablish Deadline for Deposition Designations. The operative Scheduling Order for this case established a deadline of 40 days before trial for designating deposition testimony for use at tril. This deadline passed while the bankruptcy stay was in effect. Consequently, Oil States was not able to provide its designations. Oil States requests that the Court address new deadlines for designating deposition testimony at the requested status conference. 2 Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 4001(a)(3), these orders were subject to a 14-day stay. November 5 is the first day on which relief from stay is effective, and therefore the first day on which Oil States could file this request.For these reasons, Oil States respectfully requests that the Court set an immediate status con- ference in this case to address the issues discussed above, and any other matters that the Court considers it expedient to address. Dated: November 5, 2019 Respectfully submitted, ‘SedetWRowfand, OBA No. 1498 Craig A. Fitzgerald, OBA No. 15233 Adam C. Doverspike, OBA No. 22548 Justin A. Lollman, OBA No. 32051 GABLEGOTWALS 1100 ONEOK Plaza 100 West Sth Street ‘Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-4217 Telephone (918) 595-4800 Facsimile (918) 595-4990. CounseL For PLAINTIFF O1L STATES Inpusrries, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 1 do hereby certify that on the 5" day of November 2019, a true, correct and exact copy of, the above and foregoing document was served by placing same in the United States mail, with proper postage thereon duly prepaid, to those parties as listed below: Darian B. Andersen GENERAL CounseL, P.C. 1015 Waterwood Parkway, Ste. GA Edmond, Oklahoma 73034 Attorneys for Defendants Joshua Decker, Tim Mueller, Ashwin Nambakam and Legacy Valve Systems, LLC 4 aig FitzgeraldIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA & STA; i OKLAHOMA COUNTY 10 209 cy OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC. Plaintiff, a JOSHUA DECKER, Case No. CJ-2017-8496 ‘ASHWIN NAMBAKAM, BRAD ARMSTRONG, : Judge Trevor Pemberton TIM MUELLER, and LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendants. [OURNAL ENTRY On February 19, 2019 at 10 a.m,, the Court held « hearing (“Original Hearing”) on Plaintiff Oil States Industries, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions and Motion to Compel (“Motions”) ‘guinst Defendants Joshua Decker, Ashwin Nambakam, and Legacy Valve Systems, LLC (“Sanctioned Defendants”), Plaintiff was represented by Craig Fitzgerald and Adam Doverspike. Defendants Decker, Nambukam, Mueller and Legacy were represented by Darian Anderson. Defendant Armstrong wus not « subject of the Motions, but was represented by Brett Willis. Defendants Decker and Nambakam were present at the hearing, At the direction of the Court, Plaintiff filed its Submission of Fees and Costs for Sanctions Award (“Fee Submission”). Sanctioned Defendants did not file any objection or response. The Court then conducted an additional hearing on April 2, 2019, at 9 a.m. (“Fee Hearing”), ‘The Court considered the motions, the response briefs, end the reply briefs in addition to the hearing arguments at the Original Hearing and the Fee Hearing. With respect to the Motion for Sanctions, for the reasons stated st the Originel Hearing, THE COURT FINDS: 1. Defendants Decker, Nambskam and Legacy had a duty to preserve evidence no Jater than May 1, 2017; EXHIBIT2, Defendants Decker, Nambekam and Legacy committed spolistion by destroying evidence after their duty to preserve began; 3. Defendants Decker, Nambakam and Legacy violeted Court orders by destroying evidence after the June 20, 2017 Temporary Restraining Order and after the July 3, 2017 Agreed Temporary Injunction; 4. Defendant Decker committed multiple acts of perjury during his January 15, 2018 deposition as shown in Appendix A of the Motion for Sanctions; 5. The Ehrenheus factors support « sanctions award: 4, Prejudice: There is no doubt the destruction of evidence of perjury caused ‘unnecessary costs and attorney fees to be incurred by Plaintiff. And some documents and messages remain unrecoverable. ». Interference with Judicial Process: Defendants Decker, Nambekam, and Legacy unequivocally violated the Court’s orders against deleting evidence. Defendant Decker absolutely committed perjury. And Defendants Decker, Nambekam, and Legacy made misrepresentations in their discovery responses when they swore they had “nothing to produce.”” Culpabitity: Defendants Decker, Nambakam, end Legacy each wilflly and in bad faith interfered with the judicial process end purposefully deleted evidence. Defendant Decker is the most culpable as he orchestrated the cover-up, instructed others to delete evidence, and circumvented the discovery process. there is nomeed to warn against perjury once a witness hes sworn tothe tell the truth under oxth, €. Lesser Sanctions: No lesser sanction would appropriately respond to the ‘wilful effort to subvert the judicial process, £, Merits of Underlying Claim: Given the current information reviewed by the Court, there would seem to be merit to Plaintif’s claims. ‘Therefore, with respect to the Motion for Sanctions, THE COURT ORDERS: 1, _PlaintifP’s Motion for Sanctions is granted as follows; 2, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred as‘result ofthe spolistion, inctuding the cost of preparing the Motion for Sanctions: ‘Plaintiff shal file « fe application by March 5, 2019 including time records and affidavits; b, Defendants Decker, Namsbekam, and Legacy shall notify Plaintiff within ‘ten days of receipt of the fee spplication whether they intend to retain an ‘expert to dispute the ressonsbleness of PhintfP's attorney fees and costs; © A hearing to ascertain a reasonable fee end cost award is scheduled for April 2, 2019 at 9 a.m.; 4, The reasonable fee end cost award will be spportioned by culpability: i, Decker responsible for 60% of the award; ii, Nambakem responsible for 20% of the award; iil, Legacy responsible for 20% of the award. 3. PlaintifP's request for default judgment against Defendants Decker, Nambakam, and Legacy is denied at this time. 4. Ajury instruction to make an adverse inference about missing evidence will be centered that applies solely to Defendants Decker, Nambakam, and Legecy and will not affect Armstrong. The wording of the adverse inference jury instruction will be determined closer to ‘trial.With respect to the Motion to Compel, for the reasons stated at the Original Hearing, ‘THE COURT ORDERS: 1. The Motion to Compel is granted. 2. Defendants Decker, Nambakam, and Legacy must filly respond to all issues in the Motion to Compel by March 21, 2019. 3. If Defendants Decker, Nambekam, and Legscy sre not fully compliant in responding to Plaintiff's discovery request, the Court may reconsider its decision to not enter default judgment as a sanction for discovery abuse.With respect to the Fee Submission, for the reasons stated at the Fee Hearing, THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS: 1. Plaintiff's Fee Submission contained reasonable attorney fees for the applicable legal market 2. ‘The sanctions award includes reasonable fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff due tw Sanctioned Defendants’ willful and malicious destruction of evidence, perjury, and litigation misconduct. 3. Plaintiff is entitled to sanctions award of p23 FSISEF for Sanctioned Defendants’ litigation misconduct. 4, Based on the culpability determination at the Original Hearing, the Sanctioned Defendants’ specific sanction award amounts owed are: a. Decker: $ (42, 6 8L4O b Nambakam:s 4% S63 (3 c Legacy:$ YP, 563. (4 The Hofterable Trevor Pemberton TEED a ORY Rees & new 10-2019 Approved as to form by: RICK WARREN BioatishSIGNATURE PAGE FOR JOURNAL ENTRY FOR PLAINTIFF OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC., Case No. CJ-2017-3496, In the District Court of Oklahoma County, ‘State of Okishoma. Adam C.. 7ALS 1100 ONEOK Plaza 100 West Sth Street ‘Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-4217 ommse! for Plaintiff Oil States Industries,SIGNATURE PAGE FOR JOURNAL ENTRY FOR DEFENDANTS JOSHUA DECKER, ‘TIM MUELLER, ,, ASHWIN NAMBAKAM AND LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC, Case No. CJ-2017-3496, In the District Court of Oklahoma County, State of Oklahome. Durnin EGprbrta— ‘Darian B, Andersen 1015 Waterwood Parkway, Ste. GA1 Edmond, Oklahoma 73034 Counsel for Defendants Joshua Decker, Tim Mueller, ‘Ashwin Nambakem Legacy Valve Systems, LLCSIGNATURE PAGE FOR JOURNAL ENTRY FOR DEFENDANT BRAD ARMSTRONG, Case No. CJ-2017-3496, In the District Court of Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma. jah oa rett Willis JENNINGS | TEAGUE, P. 204 N. Robinson, Ste. 1000 Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Counsel for Defendant Brad ArmstrongBSENRERREER ES ocavanuaewne yvyNMNN SEGRE IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO. C3-2017-3496 JOSHUA DECKER, ASHWIN NAMBAKAM, BRAD ARMSTRONG, TIM MUELLER, AND LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC., Defendants. tees TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR DEFENDANT'S SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY HAD ON THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HONORABLE TREVOR S. PEMBERTON, DISTRICT JUDGE WITHIN AND FOR OKLAHOMA COUNTY, OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA teen ee eee Reported By: eynehi R. Adams, CSR official court ter: 321 Park Avenue, 811 oklahoma iy OK 73102 405) 713-1105 Oklahoma License No. 101 DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT EXHIBIT tpBEB weanraunnune B 14 as 16 W 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ANDERSEN: Oh, okay. THE COURT: Okay. Very good. I think the first thing to address in my view would be the Motion for Sanctions. And then we can determine the necessity, if any, to address the Motion to Compel Discovery in the case. ‘And so certainly going to hear some argument regarding Motion for Sanctions, but let me start by saying, of course, that I've absolutely read each of the briefs that have been submitted to the Court, the motion, the response of the defendants at issue. I'm aware that there's a very brief response submitted by counsel for Mr. Armstrong just ‘to ensure that Mr. Armstrong wasn't at issue in the Motion for sanctions, and then as well the reply that was submitted by the plaintiff as well. I've mapped out, and I know it's mapped out in the motion as well, a time line that x think is pertinent for ‘the issues at hand today. and then I've also made some notes that I think are relevant for the proceeding. Before I dive into the time line and, again, I am going to allow counsel to address some of the issues, but as I've read through the motion, the exhibits and the briefs that followed, this appears to be perhaps the most egregious abuse of the legal system yet that I've seen in both my time on the bench as well as time in having litigated for nine DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPTwear aunune RE 3 14 7 Ww 20 2. 22 23 24 25 — years prior. But let's -- let's start with the time line. So as I read the exhibits and the motion there were text messages that were sent on May 1st, 2017, referencing preventing a lawsuit and, in other words, the defendant, Mr. Decker, I believe, making it known that he was aware that a lawsuit may be imminent, and at that point almost certainly, you know, if not indisputably had an obligation at that point to preserve evidence in anticipation for litigation. on May 10th, 2017, Mr. Decker, I believe, was terminated and there were texts about wiping a phone. June 20th, 2017, a lawsuit was filed by the plaintiff, O11 States Industries, Inc., and a Temporary Restraining Order was entered that generally prohibited the deletion of evidence in the case. ‘On or about June 22nd, 2017, it appears that texts were deleted by Mr. Decker and/or others. and we can dive more into the specifics in a moment. and the operating system on Mr. Decker's Computer may have been re-installed, which resulted in the deletion of or the removing of additional evidence from the computer. 3uly 3rd, 2017, an agreed temporary injunction was entered in the case again, so that the defendants would not remove, delete, destroy any evidence in the case. On July 20th, 2017, the defendants or some of the DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPTIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLATIOMA CounTY Al 2.0 2 STATE OF OKLAHOMA ae erin Ey Petitioner(s) Auorney(s) for Petitioner : avs. Case No, Respondent(s) ‘Awtorney(s) for Respondent COURT MINUTE Date: Judge _. Hearing On: Ruling By Court EXHIBIT (e€ 20 ai 22, 23 24 INTHE 1S RICT COURT OF OKLAMOKA COUNTY STATE OF OKIAHOMA OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC. Plaintift, vs pJe7 2 1-348 JOSHUA DECKER, ASHWIN NAMBAKAM, BRAD ARMSTRONG, TIM MUELLER, and LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC, betondants. ‘HR DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA RANSCRIPT OF PROCE EDINGS HAD ON THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORI Reported hy: Regina Stel, CSR OLficial Court. Reporter 321 W. Park Suite 106 Okiahowa City, Oklahoma 13102 (404) 113-7116 DISTRICL COURT — OFFICIAL ‘TRANSCRIPT THE HONORABLE NATALIE MAL, DISTRICT \IUDGE EXHIBIT 2sete © 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 53 THE COURT: Okay. There's the issue of selling valves by the fall of 2017, but some of the drawings were dated in 2018, so what drawings were used between the fall of 2017 through ~~ was it the middle of 2018 that you're thinking of? MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Somewhere around May-ish -- MR. FITZGERALD: Right. THE COURT: -- from what I can see? MR. FITZGERALD: I mean basically, Your Honor, I think that all of the prior iterations of the drawings -- THE COURT: All versions of drawings that you have on all of your parts that are being sold. And because I do not believe that litigation could continue effectively to get to a trial to where damages are -- to where we can get to a damage amount or any type of -- I just don't believe that this case can move forward without that information, So I will let you know that unless something really major comes up to hold up Production, if these things are not produced in a timely manner this time, I will grant that request for default and then we would just have the damage issue to talk about. Okay? So as far as the motion for sanction, we're going to put that off until we get to that -- the seven days -- I mean March -- I mean August 28th. I'm getting my months all mixed up. August 28th before 5:00 p.m. is the deadline. DISTRICT COURT - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPTova019 (CMECF: OKWB LIVE United States Bankruptey Court Western District of Oklahoma Notice of Bankruptey Case Filing ‘A bankruptcy case concerning the debtor(s) listed below was filed under 08/28/2019 Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. entered on 08/28/2019 at 5:11 PM and filed on 08/28/2019. Legacy Valve Systems, LLC 4200 South High Avenue Oklahoma City, OK 73129 Tax ID / EIN: 82-1050448 Douglas E. Wedge Clerk of Court ‘The case was filed by the debtor's attorney: The bankruptey trustee Darian B. Andersen ger D. Goddard A&B Law Center, LLC 224 West Gray Street, Suite 202 1015 Waterwood Parkway. Suite G-A1 Norman. OK 73069 Edmond. OK 73034 (405) 329-5297 (405) 330-2235 ‘The case was assigned case number 19-13547 to Judge Sarah A. Hall In most instances, the filing of the bankruptcy case automatically stays certain collection and other actions against the debtor and the debtor's property. Under certain circumstances, the stay may be limited to 30 days or not exist at all, although the debtor can request the court to extend or impose a stay. If you attempt to collect a debt or take ‘other action in violation of the Bankruptcy Code, you may be penalized, Consult a lawyer to determine your rights, in this case, Ifyou would like to view the bankruptcy petition and other documents filed by the debtor. they are available at our Internet home page www.okwb.uscourts.gov or at the Clerk's Office. 215 Dean A. McGee. Oklahoma City, OK. 73102. You may be a creditor of the debtor. If'so. you will receive an additional notice from the court setting forth important deadlines. Douglas E. Wedge Clerk, U.S. Bankruptey Court | PACER Service Center | Transaction Receipt Oo RUT TED [PACER Logins fea monnassa102.0 | a EXHIBIT (SS SH er ee Euz019 COMIECE:OKWE LIVE [Pescriion: Notice wt Fling _ Search Criteria hipsectokwo uscourts.goweg-bivNoticaOFFiingp?302064 [isis 2suaro1e ‘CMIECF: OKWE LIVE United States Bankruptcy Court Western District of Oklahoma Notice of Bankruptcy Case Filing FILED A bankruptcy case concerning the debtor(s) listed below was filed under 08/28/2019 Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. entered on 08/28/2019 ACY at 5:24 PM and filed on 08/28/2019. Joshua Decker 2208 Ivy Glenn Court Edmond, OK 73034 SSN / ITIN: xxx-xx-B643 Douglas €. Wedge Clerk of Court ‘The case was filed by the debtor's attorney: ‘The bankruptcy trustee is: Darian B. Andersen Ginger D. Goddard A&B Law Center. LLC 224 West Gray Street. Suite 202 1015 Waterwood Parkway. Suite G-Al Norman, OK 73069 Edmond. OK 73034 (405) 329-5297 (405) 330-2235 ‘The case was assigned case number 19-13548 to Judge Sarah A. Hall In most instances, the filing of the bankruptcy case automatically stays certain collection and other actions against the debtor and the debtor's property. Under certain circumstances, the stay may be limited to 30 days or not exist at all, although the debtor can request the court to extend or impose a stay. Ifyou attempt to collect a debt or take other action in violation of the Bankruptcy Code, you may be penalized. Consult a lawyer to determine your rights in this case. I you would like to view the bankruptcy petition and other documents filed by the debtor. they are available at our Internet home page www.okwb.uscourts gov or at the Clerk's Office. 215 Dean A. McGee. Oklahoma City, OK 73102. You may be a creditor of the debtor. I{'so, you will receive an additional notice from the court setting forth important deadlines. Douglas E. Wedge Clerk, U.S. Bankruptcy Court —_ PACER Service Center ] Transaction Re 1 oa OT9 Dav psi hwo uscours.gowegi-binlotce Fling 57903665 2swz09 CWECE: OXWe LIVE [Search Criteria: tps tec okwb.utcourts goviegbinNoiceO ng 17303085 22suraor8 (CMEC: OK WE LIVE United States Bankruptey Court Western District of Oklahoma Notice of Bankruptcy Case Filing FILED A bankruptcy case conceming the debtor(s) listed below was filed under 08/28/2019 Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, entered on 08/28/2019 oe at 5:28 PM and filed on 08/28/2019. a Ashwin Nambakam 18104 Allora Dr. Edmond, OK 73012-7637 SSN /ITIN: xxx-xx-7969 Douglas &. Wedge Clerk of Court ‘The case was filed by the debtor's attomey: The bankruptcy trustee Darian B. Andersen Ginger D. Goddard A&B Law Center. LLC 224 West Gray Street, Suite 202 1015 Waterwood Parkway. Suite G-AL Norman, OK 73069 Edmond. OK 73034 (405) 329-5297 (405) 330-2235 The case was assigned case number 19-13549 to Judge Sarah A. Hall, In most instances, the filing of the bankruptcy case automatically stays certain collection and other actions against the debtor and the debtor's property. Under certain circumstances, the stay may be limited to 30 days or not exist at all, although the debtor can request the court to extend or impose a stay. If you attempt to collect a debt or take other action in violation of the Bankruptcy Code, you may be penalized. Consult a lawyer to determine your rights in this case. If you would like to view the bankruptcy petition and other documents filed by the debtor, they are available at our Internet home page www.okwb.uscourts.gov or at the Clerk's Office. 215 Dean A. McGee, Oklahoma City, OK. 73102. You may be a creditor of the debtor. Ifso, you will receive an additional notice from the court setting forth important deadlines. Douglas E. Wedge Clerk, U.S. Bankruptcy Court ~ PACER Service Center Receipt I eee ee Ban | [tient Coder pte eee tps tect ok uscourts. govleghtinoiceOF tng 917303886 12sra019 tps eco. uscours goviegtiNoiceOfFing 517900966 COMIECF: OKWE LIVE earch 22Case: 19-13547 Doc: 34 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 1 of 2 Dated: October 21, 2019 The following Is ORDERED: Sarah A Hall United States Bankruptcy Judge UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. Inve: LEGACY VALVE SYSTEMS, LLC, Case No. 19-13547 Debtor. Chapter 7 ORDER GRANTING AMENDED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY, REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT AND NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING [DOC. 16] On October 18, 2019, the following matters came on for hearing: 1 ‘The Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay, Request for Abandonment and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (Doc. 18} (the “Motion”) filed by Oil ‘States Industries, Inc. on September 13, 2019; and = Debtor's Response to Oil States First Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay [Doc. 21] filed on September 27, 2019. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court FINDS that the Motion is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. {8525953;)Case: 19-13547 Doc: 34 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 2 of 2 Approved for entry: OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC. Craig M. Regens, OBA No. 22894 GaBLEGOTWALS One Leadership Square — 15th Floor 211 North Robinson Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Telephone: (405) 568-3313 Facsimile: (405) 235-2875 cregens@gablelaw.com {8525953;)Case: 19-13548 Doc: 29 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 1 of 2 Dated: October 21, 2019 The following is ORDERED: UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA Inre: JOSHUA DECKER, Case No. 19-13548 Debtor. Chapter 7 ORDER GRANTING AMENDED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY, REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT AND NOTICE OF ‘OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING (DOC, 18] ‘On October 18, 2019, the following matters came on for hearing: 1. The Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay, Request for Abandonment and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing [Doc. 18] (the “ Motion”) filed by Oil States Industries, Inc. on September 13, 2019; and 2. Debtor's Response to Oil States First Amended Motion for Relief from the ‘Automatic Stay [Doc. 20] filed on September 27, 2019. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court FINDS that the Motion is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. {8525959;}Case: 19-13548 Doc: 29 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 2 of 2 Approved for entry: OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC. oe Craig M. Regens, OBA No. 22894 GABLEGOTWALS ‘One Leadership Square — 15th Floor 211 North Robinson Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Telephone: (405) 568-3313 Facsimile: (405) 235-2875 cregens@gablelaw.com {8525959;}Case: 19-13549 Doc: 25 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 1 of 2 Dated: October 21, 2019 The following is ORDERED: Sarah A Hall United States Bankruptcy Judge UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. Inre: ASHWIN NAMBAKAM, Case No. 19-13549 Debtor. Chapter 7 ORDER GRANTING AMENDED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY, REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT AND NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING (DOC. 15], (On October 18, 2019, the following matters came on for hearing: 1. The Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay, Request for ‘Abandonment and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing [Doc. 15] (the “Motion”) filed by Oil States Industries, Inc. on September 13, 2019; and 2. Debtor's Response to Oil States First Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay [Doc. 17] filed on September 27, 2019. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court FINDS that the Motion is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. {8525960;)Case: 19-13549 Doc: 25 Filed: 10/21/19 Page: 2 of 2 Approved for entry: OIL STATES INDUSTRIES, INC. oh Craig M. Regens, OBA No. 22894 GABLEGOTWALS One Leadership Square — 15th Floor 211 North Robinson ‘Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Telephone: (405) 568-3313 Facsimile: (405) 235-2875 cregens@gablelaw.com {8525960;)
You might also like
Motion To Vacate Void Judgment
PDF
95% (57)
Motion To Vacate Void Judgment
14 pages
Motion To Dismiss
PDF
100% (1)
Motion To Dismiss
19 pages
March 19, 2013 PM
PDF
No ratings yet
March 19, 2013 PM
251 pages
April 2, 2013 PM
PDF
No ratings yet
April 2, 2013 PM
229 pages
March 5, 2013 PM
PDF
No ratings yet
March 5, 2013 PM
213 pages
BP Oil Spill Litigation:U.S. Appeals Judge's Decision On Motion To Compel BP To Produce Documents Based On The Crime-Fraud Exception To The Attorney-Client Privilege
PDF
No ratings yet
BP Oil Spill Litigation:U.S. Appeals Judge's Decision On Motion To Compel BP To Produce Documents Based On The Crime-Fraud Exception To The Attorney-Client Privilege
260 pages
The Trial Transcript Will Be Made Available To The Public Once It Has Been Certified and Distributed by The Official Court Reporter
PDF
No ratings yet
The Trial Transcript Will Be Made Available To The Public Once It Has Been Certified and Distributed by The Official Court Reporter
190 pages
March 4, 2013 PM
PDF
No ratings yet
March 4, 2013 PM
183 pages
Michael Avenatti Settlement Documents To Court Filed in February 2018
PDF
No ratings yet
Michael Avenatti Settlement Documents To Court Filed in February 2018
67 pages
Brief in Opposition - ECF 694 - & Exhibits
PDF
No ratings yet
Brief in Opposition - ECF 694 - & Exhibits
105 pages
Final
PDF
No ratings yet
Final
67 pages
Government's First Contempt Response
PDF
No ratings yet
Government's First Contempt Response
25 pages
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
6 pages
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit
23 pages
Filed: Patrick Fisher
PDF
No ratings yet
Filed: Patrick Fisher
11 pages
SCOTUS Order List 2021-06-28
PDF
No ratings yet
SCOTUS Order List 2021-06-28
41 pages
R.W. International Corp. and T. H. Ward de La Cruz, Inc. v. Welch Foods, Inc. and Magna Trading Corp., 937 F.2d 11, 1st Cir. (1991)
PDF
No ratings yet
R.W. International Corp. and T. H. Ward de La Cruz, Inc. v. Welch Foods, Inc. and Magna Trading Corp., 937 F.2d 11, 1st Cir. (1991)
13 pages
ALDOT Cooper Brief
PDF
No ratings yet
ALDOT Cooper Brief
51 pages
Oxman Jaroscak
PDF
No ratings yet
Oxman Jaroscak
19 pages
Hutchinson v. Hahn, 10th Cir. (2010)
PDF
No ratings yet
Hutchinson v. Hahn, 10th Cir. (2010)
13 pages
Position Paper
PDF
100% (1)
Position Paper
7 pages
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
7 pages
Shumate v. Pacific Insurance, 10th Cir. (1998)
PDF
No ratings yet
Shumate v. Pacific Insurance, 10th Cir. (1998)
12 pages
Martin v. Weyerhaeuser Company, 10th Cir. (2009)
PDF
No ratings yet
Martin v. Weyerhaeuser Company, 10th Cir. (2009)
11 pages
People v. Cross Country Oil & Petroleum, Corp., C.T.A. Crim. Case No. O-620, (May 19, 2021)
PDF
No ratings yet
People v. Cross Country Oil & Petroleum, Corp., C.T.A. Crim. Case No. O-620, (May 19, 2021)
34 pages
Smith v. McKune, 10th Cir. (2009)
PDF
No ratings yet
Smith v. McKune, 10th Cir. (2009)
6 pages
Filed: Patrick Fisher
PDF
No ratings yet
Filed: Patrick Fisher
10 pages
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
5 pages
Scotus Order List
PDF
No ratings yet
Scotus Order List
16 pages
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
7 pages
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
4 pages
Marr v. Env Thermal Sys Inc, 10th Cir. (2004)
PDF
No ratings yet
Marr v. Env Thermal Sys Inc, 10th Cir. (2004)
4 pages
Transcript of DuPuy Hearing
PDF
No ratings yet
Transcript of DuPuy Hearing
26 pages
Filed: Patrick Fisher
PDF
No ratings yet
Filed: Patrick Fisher
5 pages
Court Grants Motion To Quash Deposition of High-Ranking Commander in Red Hill Suit
PDF
No ratings yet
Court Grants Motion To Quash Deposition of High-Ranking Commander in Red Hill Suit
14 pages
Petitioners: en Banc
PDF
No ratings yet
Petitioners: en Banc
4 pages
Charles A. Meeker v. Carl A. Rizley, R. L. Minton, Lee H. Bullard, J. M. Burden, and v. P. McClain, 324 F.2d 269, 10th Cir. (1963)
PDF
No ratings yet
Charles A. Meeker v. Carl A. Rizley, R. L. Minton, Lee H. Bullard, J. M. Burden, and v. P. McClain, 324 F.2d 269, 10th Cir. (1963)
4 pages
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
PDF
No ratings yet
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
5 pages
Richard Lee Dowling, National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford, Intervening v. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, 931 F.2d 62, 10th Cir. (1991)
PDF
No ratings yet
Richard Lee Dowling, National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford, Intervening v. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, 931 F.2d 62, 10th Cir. (1991)
3 pages
0326 - 2021.02.05 Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion To Compel or in The Alternative Dismiss M.R.S's Complaint
PDF
No ratings yet
0326 - 2021.02.05 Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion To Compel or in The Alternative Dismiss M.R.S's Complaint
10 pages
Roman Torino v. Texaco, Inc, 378 F.2d 268, 3rd Cir. (1967)
PDF
No ratings yet
Roman Torino v. Texaco, Inc, 378 F.2d 268, 3rd Cir. (1967)
3 pages
Brief in Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Discovery
PDF
No ratings yet
Brief in Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel Discovery
16 pages
Kilborn v. Bakhir, 4th Cir. (2003)
PDF
No ratings yet
Kilborn v. Bakhir, 4th Cir. (2003)
4 pages
Appellant 39 S Civil Brief
PDF
No ratings yet
Appellant 39 S Civil Brief
69 pages
Family Dollar
PDF
No ratings yet
Family Dollar
6 pages
D Motion To Show Cause and Sanction P
PDF
100% (3)
D Motion To Show Cause and Sanction P
5 pages
Dismissal of Strege Complaint
PDF
No ratings yet
Dismissal of Strege Complaint
12 pages
Keyes v. Obama - 44 2009-08-21 ORDER Setting Hearing For Sept 8 On Multiple Motions
PDF
No ratings yet
Keyes v. Obama - 44 2009-08-21 ORDER Setting Hearing For Sept 8 On Multiple Motions
2 pages
2023-11-08 CM Response (De Laire v. Voris)
PDF
No ratings yet
2023-11-08 CM Response (De Laire v. Voris)
16 pages
Sanders vs. Veridiano Case Digests
PDF
50% (2)
Sanders vs. Veridiano Case Digests
4 pages
Eck Objection
PDF
No ratings yet
Eck Objection
9 pages
SBC-20-O-30011 - Decision - Trial
PDF
No ratings yet
SBC-20-O-30011 - Decision - Trial
21 pages
012725zor bp7c
PDF
No ratings yet
012725zor bp7c
15 pages
Order On Motion To Dismiss For Prosecutorial Misconduct 394th Dec 10 2024
PDF
No ratings yet
Order On Motion To Dismiss For Prosecutorial Misconduct 394th Dec 10 2024
4 pages
Sample Briefs
PDF
No ratings yet
Sample Briefs
23 pages
Rusk V Fidelity Brokerage Services Utdce-15-00853 0325.1 2
PDF
No ratings yet
Rusk V Fidelity Brokerage Services Utdce-15-00853 0325.1 2
90 pages
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall Response To Mac Marquette Filing
PDF
No ratings yet
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall Response To Mac Marquette Filing
43 pages