Substantial consummation occurs upon a “transfer of all or substantially all of the property proposed by the plan to be transferred; assumption by the debtor or by the successor to the debtor under the plan of the business or of the management of all or substantially all of the property dealt with by the plan; and commencement of distribution under the plan.” 11 U.S.C. § 1101(2). Case 1:15-cv-02342-KBF Document 40 Filed 07/23/15 Page 9 of 28 - 6 - if the Plan is substantially consummated following the requested approval of the Change of Control Application by the FCC, LightSquared will likely argue that his appeal has been equitably mooted—although, Ahuja contends, such an argument would be flawed and unavailing.

Investor Group’s contentions are without merit and should be disregarded by the Court. First, while Lighthouse has filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §1101, et seq., Lighthouse continues to exist as a legal entity. Under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, the debtor takes on the role of “debtor in possession,” 11 U.S.C. § 1101(1), allowing it to retain possession and control of its business. A debtor-in-possession operates its business and performs many functions that would fall to the trustee under other chapters of the Bankruptcy Code, including the right to sue and be sued.

Under section 1101 of the Bankruptcy Code, a plan is deemed to have been “substantially consummated” upon (i) the transfer of substantially all of the property proposed by the plan to be transferred, (ii) the reorganized debtors’ assumption of the debtors’ business, and (iii) commencement of distribution under the plan – all of which, and more, have occurred here. 11 U.S.C. § 1101(2). Where a plan has been substantially consummated, there is a presumption of equitable mootness with respect to any challenge to the order confirming the plan.

This Court in Bayou emphasized that allowing the debtor to remain in possession of the estate remained the preferred 13 Indeed, on information and belief, the Dechert firm, counsel for the Movants, continues to maintain the propriety of the Bayou order on appeal to the Second Circuit. 15 method of conducting a chapter 11 case and that a debtor entity automatically becomes the debtor in possession upon filing, citing 11 U.S.C. § 1101(1). This is of course does not license the Receiver to ignore the dictates of the Bankruptcy Code once a filing occurs.

6, 2011) [proposed 8 C.F.R. § 204.11(c)(i) J.) Nothing in the materials cited by the Court of Appeal suggests a Congressionalintent to allow state courts to make their own bonafide determination. As of the most recent amendments, neither the federal SIJ statute norits implementing regulations allow for a “bona fide” analysis or determination even by USCIS. (See 11 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J); 8 C-F.R. § 204.11.) The Court of Appeal therefore denied Biankarelief on the basis of a non- existent legal requirement.

.………….5 Thapa v. Gonzalez, 460 F.3d 323 (2d Cir. 2006)…………………………………………………………………….7 Statutes 11 U.S.C. § 1101…………………………………………………………………………………..4 11 U.S.C. § 1127………………………………………………………………………………….

Cir.1982) .............................................................................................. 18, 22 Rodriguez v. West Publ’g Corp., 563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009) ............................................................................................. 20, 21 State of California v. eBay, Inc., No. 5:12-CV-05874-EJD, 2014 WL 4273888 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2014) ....................... 19, 24 Staton v. Boeing, 327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003) ................................................................................................... 16 West v. Circle K Stores, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42074 (E.D. Cal. 2006) ..................................................................... 18 Case 3:13-cv-03570-RS Document 43 Filed 01/28/15 Page 6 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v Case No. 13 Civ. 3570-RS NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL; MEMORANDUM STATUTES 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. .............................................................................................................. 4, 6 11 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. .................................................................................................................... 6 CAL. CORP. CODE § 25501.5 ....................................................................................................... 1, 5 CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504 .......................................................................................................... 1, 5 CAL. CORP. CODE § 25504.

..................................11 In re Winstar Comm’cns, 348 B.R. 234 (Bankr. D. Del. 2005) ........................................................................................13 Case 2:13-mc-01096-SJF Document 8 Filed 02/18/14 Page 4 of 25 PageID #: 68 - 3 - Statutes 11 U.S.C. § 502..............................................................................................................................11 11 U.S.C. § 502(d) .........................................................................................................................13 11 U.S.C. § 510(c) .......................................................................................................................5, 9 11 U.S.C. § 542..........................................................................................................................9, 13 11 U.S.C. § 553..............................................................................................................................11 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq....................................................................................................8, 9, 11, 18 11 U.S.C. § 1102(a)(1).....................................................................................................................4 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) .....................................................................................................................6, 14 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2) ......................................................................................................................9 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(B) .................................................................................................7, 9, 12, 13 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(E) ...............................................................................................................13 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(K)...........................................................................................................9, 13 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(O)....................

See (Doc. #334 at 16:7-12); see also 11 U.S.C. § 1101; In re Indu Craft Inc., 2012 WL 3070387, at *13 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2012) (“whether a plan has been substantially consummated is a factual finding that is reviewed on appeal for clear error”). Thus, a presumption of mootness applies, and the appeal “should be dismissed unless several enumerated requirements” as set forth in Frito-Lay, Inc. v. LTV Steel Co., Inc. (In re Chateaugay Corp.), 10 F.3d 944, 952-53 (2d Cir. 1993) (“Chateaugay Corp. II”) are satisfied.

See (Doc. #334 at 16:7-12); see also 11 U.S.C. § 1101; In re Indu Craft Inc., 2012 WL 3070387, at *13 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2012) (“whether a plan has been substantially consummated is a factual finding that is reviewed on appeal for clear error”). Thus, a presumption of mootness applies, and the appeal “should be dismissed unless several enumerated requirements” as set forth in Frito-Lay, Inc. v. LTV Steel Co., Inc. (In re Chateaugay Corp.), 10 F.3d 944, 952-53 (2d Cir. 1993) (“Chateaugay Corp. II”) are satisfied.