IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE : Chapter 11 : : Case No.

07-10416 (KJC) : (Jointly Administered) : : :

In re: NEW CENTURY TRS HOLDINGS, INC., et al., 1 Debtors.

NOTICE OF AGENDA OF MATTERS SCHEDULED FOR HEARING ON MARCH 7, 2013 AT 10:00 A.M. (Any party who wishes to appear telephonically must contact CourtCall, LLC by telephone (866-582-6878) or facsimile (866-533-2946) no later than 12:00 p.m. ET one business day prior to the hearing.) I. CONTINUED MATTERS: 1. Debtors Non-Substantive Objection Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 502, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3007 and 9014 and Del. Bankr. L.R. 3007-1 to Claim of Internal Revenue Service for Which Insufficient Documentation is Attached to the Filed Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 5025; filed 2/22/08] Objection Deadline: March 18, 2008 Objections/Responses Received: A. Internal Revenue Services Responses to Debtors Non-Substantive Objection Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 502, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3007 and 9014 and Del. Bankr. L.R. 3007-1 to Claim of Internal Revenue Service for Which Insufficient Documentation is Attached to the Filed Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 5391; filed 3/18/08]

Related Documents: None to date.

The pre-confirmation Debtors were the following entities: New Century Financial Corporation (f/k/a New Century REIT, Inc.), a Maryland corporation; New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. (f/k/a new Century Financial Corporation), a Delaware corporation; New Century Mortgage Corporation (f/k/a JBE Mortgage) (d/b/a NCMC Mortgage Corporate, New Century Corporation, New Century Mortgage Ventures, LLC), a California corporation; NC Capital Corporation, a California corporation; Home123 Corporation (f/k/a The Anyloan Corporation, 1800anyloan.com, Anyloan.com), a California corporation; New Century Credit Corporation (f/k/a Worth Funding Incorporated), a California corporation; NC Asset Holding, L.P. (f/k/a NC Residual II Corporation), a Delaware limited partnership; NC Residual III Corporation, a Delaware corporation; NC Residual IV Corporation, a Delaware corporation; New Century R.E.O. Corp., a California corporation; New Century R.E.O. II Corp., a California corporation; New Century R.E.O. III Corp., a California corporation; New Century Mortgage Ventures, LLC (d/b/a Summit Resort Lending, Total Mortgage Resource, Select Mortgage Group, Monticello Mortgage Services, Ad Astra Mortgage, Midwest Home Mortgage, TRATS Financial Services, Elite Financial Services, Buyers Advantage Mortgage), a Delaware limited liability company; NC Deltex, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; NCoral, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership; and New Century Warehouse Corporation, a California corporation.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

Status: The objection is continued to the next omnibus hearing date in these cases. 2. The New Century Liquidating Trusts Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10184; filed 8/13/10] Objection deadline: September 8, 2010 Objections/Responses Received2: A. Informal Response Received from the City of New York Department of Finance

Related Documents: i. ii. Notice of Submission of Claims [Dkt. No. 10210; filed 9/2/10] Notice of Withdrawal Without Prejudice [Re: SunGard Availability Services, LC] [Dkt. No. 10220; filed 9/8/10] Notice of Withdrawal of Response of Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Substantive) [Dkt. No. 10227; filed 9/15/10] Order Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Substantive) [Dkt. No. 10235; filed 9/21/10] Order (Second) Granting The New Century Liquidating Trust's ThirtyThird Omnibus Objection To Claims [Dkt. No. 10257; filed 10/20/10] Order (Third) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Substantive) [Dkt. No. 10354; filed 1/3/11] Notice of Withdrawal of the New Century Liquidating Trust's Third-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Substantive] as it Relates to Claim No. 1826 [Dkt. No. 10364; filed 1/5/11] Order (Fourth) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Substantive) [Dkt. No. 10436; filed 4/4/11]

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

Only those responses not previously resolved are listed.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

ix.

Order (Fifth) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims [Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10452; filed 4/20/11] Order (Amended) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's ThirtyThird Omnibus Objection to Claims [Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10474; filed 5/6/11] Order (Sixth) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trusts Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10502; filed 6/9/11] Order (Seventh) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's ThirtyThird Omnibus Objection to Claims (Substantive) [Dkt. No. 10517; filed 7/14/11]

x.

xi.

xii.

Status: The objection as it relates to the claim(s) filed by the City of New York Department of Finance is continued to the next omnibus hearing date in these cases. II. MATTERS UNDER ADVISEMENT 3. Debtors Eighteenth Omnibus Objection: Substantive Objection Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 502, 503, 506 and 507, Bankruptcy Rules 3007 and 9014, and Local Rule 3007-1 to Certain (A) Books and Records Claims; (B) Insufficient Documentation Claims; (C) Multiple-Debtor Duplicate Claims; and (D) Reduced and/or Reclassified Claims [Dkt. No. 5537; filed 3/27/08] Objection deadline: April 30, 2008 Objections/Responses Received: A. Response to Debtors Eighteenth Omnibus Objection to Claims (filed by Washington Mutual) [Dkt. No. 6593; filed 5/7/08]

Related Documents: i. ii. Claim No. 3759 filed by Pierre Augustin Notice of Withdrawal of Debtors Eighteenth Omnibus Objection: Substantive Objection Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 502, 503, 506 and 507, Bankruptcy Rules 3007 and 9014, and Local Rule 3007-1 to Certain (A) Books and Records Claims; (B) Insufficient Documentation Claims; (C) Multiple-Debtor Duplicate Claims; and (D) Reduced and/or Reclassified Claims Re: Claim No. 3537 of Natixis Real Estate Capital, Inc. [Dkt. No. 6400; filed 4/22/08]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

iii. iv. v.

Scheduling Order Regarding Objections to Claims of Pierre R. Augustin [Dkt. No. 8905; filed 9/5/08] Order Regarding Discovery In Connection With Objections To Claims of Pierre R. Augustin [Dkt. No. 9176; filed 11/20/08] Order Disallowing And Expunging Duplicate Claim Set Forth In The Debtors' Fifteenth Omnibus Objection To Claims And Reclassifying Remaining Claim [Dkt. No. 9323; filed 1/29/09] Order Regarding Claim of Pierre R. Augustin And Issuance of Third Party Subpoenas [Dkt. No. 9365; filed 3/6/09] Order Disallowing And Expunging Duplicate Claim Set Forth In The Debtors Fifteenth Omnibus Objection To Claims And Reclassifying Remaining Claim [Dkt. No. 9367; filed 3/6/09] Order (AMENDED) Reclassifying Claim of Patrick J. Moloney Set Forth In The Debtors Eighteenth Omnibus Objection To Claims [Dkt. No. 9379; filed 3/12/09] Memorandum Order Granting Motion to Dismiss [Re: Pierre R. Augustin] (U.S. District Court BAP-09-69) [Dkt. No. 10150; filed 7/20/09] Order Approving Stipulation Between New Century Liquidating Trust and Washington Mutual Bank Fixing and Allowing Its Claim Related to a Certain Sublease Agreement [Dkt. No. 10290; filed 11/10/10] Scheduling Order Regarding Submissions of Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law from Evidentiary Hearing on Claim of Pierre Augustin [Dkt. No. 10326; entered 12/2/10] Notice of Submission of the New Century Liquidating Trusts Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law re: Augustin Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 10345; filed 12/17/10] Affidavit of Mr. Pierre-Richard Augustin Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law For Equitable Relief With Supporting Authority [Dkt. No. 10413; filed 3/4/11]

vi. vii.

viii.

ix. x.

xi.

xii.

xiii.

Status: The only claim subject to the objection that has not been resolved or adjudicated is the claim of Pierre Augustin (the Augustin Claim). On October 20, 2010, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on the merits of the Augustin Claim. The Trust and Mr. Augustin have filed their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. This matter is ripe for decision.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

4.

Motion to Reconsider Order Disallowing and Expunging Certain (A) Amended and Superseded Claims; (B) Late Filed Claims; and (C) No Supporting Documentation Claims Set Forth in Debtors' Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims [Dkt. No. 9229; filed 12/10/08] Objection deadline: January 13, 2009 Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust and Reorganized New Century Warehouse Corporation to the Request by Alfonso and Janet Longo to Reconsider the Order Disallowing and Expunging Certain (A) Amended and Superseded Claims; (B) Late Filed Claims; (C) No Supporting Documentation Claims Set Forth in Debtors' Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims [Dkt. No. 9287; filed 1/13/09]

Related Documents: i. Debtors Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims: Non-Substantive Objection Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502, 503, 506 and 507, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3007 and 9014, and Del. Bankr. L.R. 3007-1 to Certain (A) Amended And Superseded Claims; (B) Late Filed claims; and (C) No Supporting Documentation Claims [Dkt. No. 7017; filed 5/14/08] Order Disallowing and Expunging Certain (A) Amended and Superseded Claims; (B) Late Filed Claims; and (C) No Supporting Documentation Claims Set Forth in Debtors' Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims [Dkt. No. 8553; filed 7/11/08] Order Granting Request of Alfonso and Janet Longo for Reconsideration of the July 11, 2008 Order Expunging Their Claims and Setting Hearing and Discovery Schedule Regarding the Value of Such Claim [Dkt. No. 9753; filed 7/29/09] Documentation provided in Support of Their Action Against New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. [Filed by Janet Longo] [Dkt. No. 9891; filed 9/25/09 Proof of Claim of Alfonso and Janet Longo Scheduling Order Regarding Submissions of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding Claimants Alfonso and Janet Longo [Dkt. No. 9982; filed 12/14/09] The Trusts Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law [Dkt. No. 10023; filed 1/25/10] Preliminary Statement Regarding Scheduling Order Regarding Submissions of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding Claimants Alfonso and Janet Longo [Dkt. No. 10049; filed 3/11/10]

ii.

iii.

iv. v. vi.

vii. viii.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

ix.

Notice of Completion of Briefing Regarding Alfonso and Janet Longos' Motion to Reconsider Order Disallowing and Expunging Certain (A) Amended and Superseded Claims; (B) Late Filed Claims; (C) No Supporting Documentation Claims Set Forth in Debtors' Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims [Dkt. No. 10066; filed 4/7/10] Order Scheduling a Telephonic Status Conference Regarding the Motion of Alfonso and Janet Longo [Dkt. No. 10947; filed 6/19/12]

x.

Status: A Notice of Completion of Briefing has been filed. This matter is under advisement. 5. Motion of Kimberly S. Cromwell, Pro Se to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10113; filed 5/26/10] Objection deadline: June 14, 2010 Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection to the Motion of Kimberly S. Cromwell, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10123; filed 6/17/2010]

Related Documents: i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. Certificate of No Objection [Dkt. No. 10131; filed 6/18/2010] Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 10302; filed 11/19/2010] Certification of Counsel Relating to the Stipulation Regarding Mediation [Dkt. No. 10549; filed 8/19/2011] Mediators Certificate of Completion [Dkt. No. 10612; filed 10/20/2011] Notice of Trial Re: Kimberly S. Cromwell [Dkt. No. 10648; filed 11/30/2011] Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 10657; filed 12/5/2011] Notice of Status Conference Re: Kimberly S. Cromwell [Dkt. No. 10677; filed 12/16/2011] Order Approving Modified Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 10711; filed 1/24/2012] Order Scheduling Evidentiary Hearing Regarding Motion of Kimberly Cromwell, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed and the New Century Liquidating Trust's Objection to the Cromwell Motion [Dkt. No. 10805; filed 3/7/2012]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

x. xi.

Scheduling Order for Post-Hearing Submissions [Dkt. No. 10931; filed 6/8/2012] Post-Hearing Submission in the matter of The New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of Order Regarding Compliance with Bar Date Matters and Acceptance of Claim #4119 as a Timely Filed Claim [Dkt. No. 10939; filed 6/15/12] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Post-Hearing Submission With Respect to (I) the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine That the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10824]; and (II) The Motion of Kimberly S. Cromwell, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10113] [Dkt. No. 10948; filed 6/28/12]

xii.

Status: The court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter on May 23, 2012. The parties have submitted post-hearing briefing pursuant to the terms of the Amended Scheduling Order, and no further briefing is contemplated. Accordingly, this matter is ripe for decision. 6. New Century Liquidating Trusts Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Non-Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10562; filed 8/26/11] Objection deadline: September 20, 2011 Objections/Responses Received: A. Claimant Karan Russell Response to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Dkt. No. 10574; filed 9/21/11] Claimant Tiphanie Goines Response to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Dkt. No. 10575; filed 9/21/11] Response of Claimants, Kimberly S. Cromwell, Mary Guinto and Thomas A. Guinto and W. Mark Frazer and Konilynn Frazer to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Fourt-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Non-Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10576; filed 9/22/11]

B.

C.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

D.

The New Century Liquidating Trusts Reply to Responses Received From Claimants Russell and Goines Regarding Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Non-Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10577; filed 9/22/11] Response of Helen Galope to the New Century Liquidating Trusts FortySecond Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Dkt. No. 10578; filed 9/23/11] Opposition of Tiphanie Goines to New Century Liquidating Trust's Reply Response to Forty-Second Omnibus Objection: Substantive Objection to Claim [Dkt. No. 10587; filed 9/26/11]

E.

F.

Related Documents: i. Scheduling Order Regarding the Responses to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 [Non-Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10598; filed 10/12/11] Scheduling Order Regarding Response to the New Century Liquidation Trust's Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims [Non-Substantive] [Dkt. No. 10629; filed 11/15/11] Notice of Evidentiary Hearing Re: Tiphanie Goines, Karan Russell and Alfred A. Silva [Dkt. No. 10647; filed 11/30/11] Notice of Status Conference Re: Tiphanie Goines, Karan Russell, Alfred A. Silva and Annette Lamour [Dkt. No. 10676; filed 12/16/11] Notice of Adjourned Hearing (Re: Tiphanie Goines, Karan Russell, Alfred A. Silva and Annette Lamour) [Dkt. No. 10709; filed 1/20/12] Memorandum related to The New Century Liquidating Trust's FortySecond Omnibus Objection to Claims -- specifically the claim of Helen Galope (Claim #4131) [Dkt. No. 10725; filed 2/7/12] Order relating to Memorandum re Galope Claim [Dkt. No. 10726; filed 2/7/12] Notice of Evidentiary Hearing [Dkt. No. 10736; filed 2/15/12] Exhibit and Witness List with Respect to the Claim of Tiphanie Goines [Dkt. No. 10795; filed 3/5/12]

ii.

iii. iv. v. vi.

vii. viii. ix.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

x. xi.

Exhibit and Witness List with Respect to the Claim of Karan Russell [Dkt. No. 10797; filed 3/5/12] Order (Second) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion in Limine to Admit Certain Evidence Introduced at the December 13, 2011 Evidentiary Hearing Solely to the Extent Such Evidence Related to the Sufficiency of Constructive Notice of the Bar Date [Dkt. No. 10806; filed 3/7/12] Order (With Revisions Made By Court) Granting the New Century Liquidating Trust's Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 (Non-Substantive) to Claims Filed by Tiphanie Goines [Dkt. No. 10860; filed 4/23/2012] Order Scheduling Evidentiary Hearing Regarding the New Century Liquidating Trust's Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 502(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001, 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1 (Non-Substantive) (Dkt. No. 10562) and the Response of Karan Russell (Dkt. No. 10574) [Dkt. No. 10859; filed 4/23/2012]

xii.

xiii.

Status: The Court has previously sustained the objection as it relates to Helen Galope and Tiphanie Goines. An evidentiary hearing regarding whether the late-filed claim of Karan Russell should be deemed timely filed was held on July 12, 2012. This matter is ripe for decision as it relates to Karan Russell. 7. Motion of Christine Konar, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10743; filed 2/21/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to (I) the Motion of Christine Konar, Pro Se, to Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10743], and (II) Motion to File Amended Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 10744] [Dkt. No. 10845; filed 4/18/2012] Response to Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to (I) the Motion of Christine Konar, Pro Se, to Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed, and (II) Motion to File Amended Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 10880; filed 5/7/2012]

B.

Related Documents:

130566.01600/40205659v.1

i.

Scheduling Order Regarding The Motion Of Christine Konar, Pro Se, To Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10743], The Motion Of Christine Konar To File An Amended Proof Of Claim [Dkt. No. 10744], And The New Century Liquidating Trusts Objection To The Konar Motions [Dkt. No. 10845] [Dkt. No. 10925; filed 6/7/2012] Agreement to Consent and Prepare Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 10934; filed 6/12/2012]

ii.

Status: The court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter on July 12, 2012. This matter is ripe for decision. 8. Motion to File Amended Proof of Claim [Filed by Christine Konar] [Dkt. No. 10744; filed 2/21/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to (I) the Motion of Christine Konar, Pro Se, to Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10743], and (II) Motion to File Amended Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 10744] [Dkt. No.10845; filed 4/18/2012] Response to Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to (I) the Motion of Christine Konar, Pro Se, to Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed, and (II) Motion to File Amended Proof of Claim [Dkt. No. 10880; filed 5/7/2012]

B.

Related Documents: i. Scheduling Order Regarding The Motion Of Christine Konar, Pro Se, To Consider Proof Of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10743], The Motion Of Christine Konar To File An Amended Proof Of Claim [Dkt. No. 10744], And The New Century Liquidating Trusts Objection To The Konar Motions [Dkt. No. 10845] [Dkt. No.10925; filed 6/7/2012] Agreement to Consent and Prepare Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 10934; filed 6/12/2012]

ii.

Status: The court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter on July 12, 2012. This matter is ripe for decision. 9. The New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine That the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10824; filed 4/2/2012] Objection deadline: April 18, 2012
130566.01600/40205659v.1

Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection to The New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion in Limine to Admit Certain Evidence Introduced at the December 13, 2011 Evidentiary Hearing Solely to the Extent Such Evidence Related to the Sufficiency of Constructive Notice of the Bar Date [Filed by Christine Konar] [Dkt. No. 10835; filed 4/16/2012] Response of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White In Objection ot the New Century Liquidating Trust Motion Requesting an Order that the Debtors Have Complied with the Bar Date Order for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice [Dkt. No. 10841; filed 4/18/2012] Objection Of Claimants, Mary Guinto And Thomas A. Guinto, To The New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine That the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10842; filed 4/18/2012] Opposition to Motion to Approve the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine That the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 10848; filed 4/18/2012] Kimberly Cromwell and Karan Russell Objection to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of Order that Debtors have Complied with Bar Date [Dkt. No. 10849; filed 4/18/2012] Omnibus Reply of the New Century Liquidating Trust to Objections to Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine that the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10853; filed 4/20/2012]

B.

C.

D.

E.

F.

Related Documents: i. Kimberly Cromwell and Karan Russell Notice of Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Objection to Trust Motion to Determine Debtors Complied with Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10850; filed 4/18/2012]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

ii.

Response of the New Century Liquidating Trust to Kimberly Cromwell and Karan Russell's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Objection to Trust Motion to Determine Debtors Complied with Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10897; filed 5/21/2012] Order Scheduling Evidentiary Hearing Regarding the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine that the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10878; filed 5/1/2012] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Post-Hearing Submission With Respect to (I) the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for Entry of an Order to Determine That the Debtors Have Complied With the Order Establishing Bar Dates for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving Form, Manner and Sufficiency of Notice Thereof [Dkt. No. 10824]; and (II) The Motion of Kimberly S. Cromwell, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Dkt. No. 10948; filed 6/28/12]

iii.

iv.

Status: The Court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter on May 23, 2012. This matter is ripe for decision. 10. Motion for Removal of Trustee filed by Helen Galope [Dkt. No. 10883; filed 5/9/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. The New Century Liquidating Trusts Objection to Helen Galope's Motion to Impeach/Remove the Trustee [Dkt. No. 10955; filed 7/3/2012]

Related Documents: i. Memorandum and Order Dismissing Motions for Reconsideration [Dkt. No. 10890; filed 5/17/2012]

Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. 11. Second Motion for Reconsideration [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 10917; filed 6/1/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received:
130566.01600/40205659v.1

A.

The New Century Liquidating Trust Objection to Helen Galope's Second Motion for Reconsideration of February 7, 2012 Order [Dkt. No.10959; filed 7/5/2012]

Related Documents: i. Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Plaintiff's 2nd Motion for Reconsideration [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No.11009; filed 8/20/2012]

Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. 12. 2nd Motion Demand for Validation of Subscribed Oaths of Office and Bonds for all Public and Private Officials, Motion to Subpoena the Records, Contracts, Purchase and Sale of the Lamour Property, 2nd Motion to Invoke the Rule 2019 and Challenge Jurisdiction of the Court [Filed by Annette Lamour] [Dkt. No. 10932; filed 6/8/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection Of The New Century Liquidating Trust To Annette Lamours Second Motion Demand For Validation Of Subscribed Oaths Of Office And Bonds For All Public And Private Officials, Challenge Jurisdiction Of The Court, Motion To Subpoena The Records Contracts, Purchase And Sale Of The Lamour Property, And Second Motion To Invoke The Rule 2019 [Dkt. No.10958; filed 7/5/2012]

Related Documents: None to date. Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. 13. Request for Extension and be Permitted to File a Proper Response in Consideration of Recent Unfolding Event of Barclays Bank's LIBOR Rate Rigging [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 10982; filed 7/16/2012] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection Of The New Century Liquidating Trust To Helen Galopes Request for Extension and be Permitted to File a Proper Response in Consideration of Recent Unfolding Event of Barclays Bank's LIBOR Rate Rigging [Dkt. No.10997; filed 7/27/2012]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

Related Documents: None to date. Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. 14. Molly S. White & Ralph N. White v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., et al. (Adv. Pro. No. 10-55357): Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Discovery [Adv. Dkt. No. 47; filed 2/16/2011] Objections/Responses Received A. The New Century Liquidating Trusts Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Discovery [Adv. Dkt. No. 56; filed 5/3/2011] Related Documents: i. Scheduling Order Regarding the Claim and Complaint Filed by Ralph and Molly White [Adv. Dkt. No. 9; filed 12/13/10] Initial Disclosure by New Century TRS Holding [Adv. Dkt. No. 20; filed 1/3/2011] Plaintiffs First Request for Production of Documents [Dkt. No. 10238; filed 9/30/10] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Responses to Whites Document Request [Adv. Dkt. No. 13; filed 12/29/2010] Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories [Dkt. No. 10239; filed 9/30/10] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Responses to first Set of Interrogatories of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 19; filed 12/30/2010] Plaintiffs First Set of Admissions [Dkt. No.10241; filed 10/1/10] The New Century Liquidating Trust's Responses to the Whites First Set of Admissions [Adv. Dkt. No. 14; filed 12/29/10] Plaintiffs Second Request for Production of Documents [Adv. Dkt. No. 17; filed 12/29/10] The New Century Liquidating Trust's Responses to the Second Request for Production of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 37; filed 1/28/11]

ii.

iii.

iv.

v. vi.

vii. viii.

ix.

x.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

xi.

The New Century Liquidating Trusts Responses to the Additional Request for Documents of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 69; filed 9/16/11] Exhibits to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Responses to the Additional Request for Documents of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 71; filed 9/21/11] Memorandum of New Century Liquidating Trust Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint with Exhibit 1 containing (Declaration of Donna Walker) [Adv. Dkt. No. 11; filed 12/15/2010] Reply of the New Century Liquidating Trust to the Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint with Supplemental Declaration [Adv. Dkt. No. 30; filed 01/21/2011] Supplemental Declaration of Donna Walker by New Century Liquidating Trust [Adv. Dkt. No. 51; filed 4/29/11] Notice of Filing of Declaration of Llewellyn Adams evidencing the Filing of Assignment of Mortgage by Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. as Attorney-InFact for New Century Mortgage Corporation [Adv. Dkt. No. 89; filed 5/18/2012] Transcript of May 23, 2012 Omnibus Hearing [Adv. Dkt. No 94; filed 5/30/12] Certification of Counsel Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery [Adv. Dkt. No. 96; filed 6/1/2012] Letter to the Court regarding the May 23, 2012 Status Conference Hearing filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 99; filed 6/6/2012] Molly S. White and Ralph N. Whites Objection to Certification of Counsel Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery [Adv. Dkt. No. 100; filed 6/6/2012] Letter to the Court regarding the May 23, 2012 Status Conference Hearing Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 101; filed 6/11/2012] Supplemental Exhibit to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Responses to Both the Request for Documents and Additional Request for Documents of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 102; filed 7/3/12]

xii.

xiii.

xiv.

xv.

xvi.

xvii.

xviii.

xix.

xx.

xxi.

xxii.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

xxiii.

The New Century Liquidating Trusts Response to the Letter to the Court Filed by Ralph and Molly White [Adv. Dkt. No. 103; filed 7/3/2012] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Response to the Plaintiffs' Objection to Certification of Counsel Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery [Adv. Dkt. No. 104; filed 7/3/2012] The Whites Objection to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Filing of Unsolicited and Untimely Supplemental Exhibits [Adv. Dkt. No. 107; filed 7/11/12] The Whites Reply to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Response to the Letter to the Court Filed by Ralph and Molly White [Adv. Dkt. No. 108; filed 7/11/12] Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201 Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 111; filed 8/24/12]

xxiv.

xxv.

xxvi.

xxvii.

Status: The Court held a Status Conference on May 23, 2012. The Court advised the parties it would take the Motion under advisement and if further discussions were needed, the Court would advise the Parties of the need to do so. 15. Molly S. White & Ralph N. White v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., et al. (Adv. Pro. No. 10-55357): Motion to Reconsider Dismissal of Counts II and VIII of Complaint [Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White] [Adv. Dkt. No. 61; filed 6/17/2011] Objections/Responses Received A. Objection to the Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Count II and Count VIII of Plaintiffs Adversary Complaint [Adv. Dkt. No. 64; filed 7/1/2011] Reply to the New Century Liquidating Trust Objection to Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Count II and Count VIII of Plaintiffs Adversary Complaint [Adv. Dkt. No. 65; filed 7/11/2011]

B.

Related Documents: i. Memorandum of New Century Liquidating Trust Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint with Exhibit 1 containing (Declaration of Donna Walker) [Adv. Dkt. No. 11; 12/15/2010]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

ii.

Memorandum Relating to Trustees Motion to Dismiss Adversary Complaint of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White to Determine Dischargeability of Debt Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(2)(A) and (B), (a)(3)(B), (a)(4), (a)(6) and (19)(A) and (B) and Rule 7001 of Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure [Adv. Dkt. No. 59; filed 6/7/2011] Order Granting In Part And Dismissing In Part Trustees Motion To Dismiss Adversary Complaint Of Molly S. White And Ralph N. White To Determine Dischargeability of Debt [Adv. Dkt. No. 60; filed 6/7/2011] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Responses to the Additional Request for Documents of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 69; filed 9/16/11] Notice of Filing of Certified Copy of Morgan Stanley ABS Capital 1 Inc. Trust 2006-NC5 filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 79; filed 2/8/2012] Plaintiff's Supplemental Exhibits in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Counts II and Count VIII of Plaintiff's Adversary Complaint [Dkt. No. 10889; filed 5/17/2012] Notice of Filing of Declaration of Llewellyn Adams evidencing the Filing of Assignment of Mortgage by Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. as Attorney-InFact for New Century Mortgage Corporation [Adv. Dkt. No. 89; filed 5/18/2012] Letter to the Court regarding the May 23, 2012 Status Conference Hearing filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 99; filed 6/6/2012] Letter to the Court regarding the May 23, 2012 Status Conference Hearing Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 101; filed 6/11/2012] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Response to the Letter to the Court Filed by Ralph and Molly White [Adv. Dkt. No. 103; filed 7/3/2012] The Whites Objection to the New Century Liquidating Trust filing of Unsolicited and Untimely Supplemental Exhibits [Adv. Dkt. No. 107; filed 7/11/2012] The Whites Reply to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Response to the Letter to the Court Filed by Ralph an Molly White [Adv. Dkt. No. 108; filed 7/11/12]

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

ix.

x.

xi.

xii.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

xiii.

Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201 Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 111; filed 8/24/12]

Status: The Court held a Status Conference on May 23, 2012. The Court advised the parties it would take the Motion under advisement upon resolution of the Whites Motion to Compel and if further discussions were needed, the Court would advise the Parties of the need to do so. 16. Alfred A. Silva v. New Century Mortgage Corporation (Adv. Pro. No. 11-53199): Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Adv. Dkt. No. 2; filed 9/16/11] Objection deadline: None Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to the Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Adv. Dkt. No. 7; filed 10/26/11]

Related Documents: i. Scheduling Order Regarding Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Adv. Pro. Dkt. No. 2] and the Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to the Silva Motion [Adv Pro. Dkt. No. 7] [Adv. Dkt. No. 11; filed 11/15/11] Notice of Status Conference Re: Tiphanie Goines, Karan Russell, Alfred A. Silva and Annette Lamour [Dkt. No. 10676; filed 12/16/11] Notice of Adjourned Hearing (Re: Tiphanie Goines, Karan Russell, Alfred A. Silva and Annette Lamour) [Dkt. No. 10709; filed 1/20/12] Notice of Evidentiary Hearing [Dkt. No. 10738; filed 2/15/12] Amended Scheduling Order Regarding Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se, to Consider Proof of Claim Timely Filed [Adv. Dkt. No. 27; filed 2/29/12] The New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion to Preclude Alfred A. Silva From Introducing Evidence at the Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7037 and Local Rule 7026-1 [Dkt. No. 10746; filed 2/21/12] Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se Requesting Deferral of any Court Appearances [Dkt. No. 10899; filed 5/22/12]

ii.

iii.

iv. v.

vi.

vii.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

viii.

Order Granting, in Part, the Motion of Alfred A. Silva, Pro Se, Requesting Deferral of any Court Appearances [Dkt. No. 10914; filed 5/29/12] Certification of Counsel Regarding the Order Granting The New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion to Preclude Alfred A. Silva From Introducing Evidence at the Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7037 and Local Rule 7026-1 [Dkt. No. 10923; filed 6/4/12] Order Granting The New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion to Preclude Alfred A. Silva From Introducing Evidence at the Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7037 and Local Rule 7026-1 [Dkt. No. 10924; filed 6/6/12]

ix.

x.

Status: The Court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter on July 12, 2012. This matter is ripe for decision. 17. Molly S. White & Ralph N. White v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., et al. (Adv. Pro. No. 10-55357): Plaintiffs Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201 [Adv. Dkt. No. 111; Main Case Dkt. No. 11011; filed 8/24/2012] Related Documents: A. Notice to the Court Regarding the Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 113; Main Case Dkt. No. 11019; filed 9/14/2012] B. Response of New Century Liquidating Trust to (I) Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201 [D.I. 11011], and (II) Notice to the Court Regarding the Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice [D.I. 11019] [Main Case Dkt. No. 11021; filed 9/28/2012] C. Plaintiffs Reply in Response to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Objections to Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201 [D.I. 11011], and Notice to the Court Regarding the Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice [D.I. 10119] [Main Case Dkt. No. 11025; filed 10/18/2012] D. Certificate of No Objection Regarding Request for Judicial Notice Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [Adv. Dkt. No. 114; filed 10/18/2012] E. Response to the Certification of No Objection Regarding Docket No. 111 Filed by Molly S. White and Ralph N. White [D.I. 114] [Adv. Dkt. No. 115; filed 10/26/2012]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

F. Objection to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Response to the Certification of No Objection [Adv. Dkt. No. 117; filed 11/5/2012] Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. 18. Motion to Allow Determination of Claim 4144 and Adversary Proceeding No. 1250187 Non-Dischargeable and Allow Trial Filed by Christine Konar [Dkt. No. 11029; filed 11/27/12] Objection Deadline: None. Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection of the New Century Liquidating Trust to the Motion of Christine Konar for Determination of Claim 4144 and Adversary Proceeding No. 1250187 Non-Dischargeable and Allow Trial [Dkt. No. 11037; filed 12/20/12] Related Documents: None to date. Status: Pursuant to the Courts instruction at the July 12, 2012 hearing, this matter is under advisement. A hearing on this matter will only be held upon request of the Court. III. 19. CONTESTED MATTERS: Motion of the New Century Liquidating Trust for an Order Extending the Trust Termination Date Through and Including August 1, 2015 [Dkt. No. 11066; filed 2/14/13] Objection Deadline: February 28, 2013 Objections/Responses Received: A. The Limited Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White to New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Extending the Trusts Termination Date Through and Including August 1, 2015 [Dkt. No. 11080; filed 3/1/13] B. Response of the New Century Liquidating Trust to the Limited Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion for an Order Extending the Trust's Termination Date Through and Including August 1, 2015 [Dkt. No. 11086; filed 3/4/13 ] Related Documents: None. Status: The hearing on this matter will go forward.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

20.

The New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11067; filed 2/14/13] Objection Deadline: February 28, 2013 Objections/Responses Received: A. Objection to Motion to Abandon and Destroy Mortgage Loan Files [Filed by Lina Cruz] [Dkt. No. 11069; filed 2/26/13] B. Objection to Motion to Abandon and Destroy Mortgage Loan Files [Filed by Ann Marie DiLibero] [Dkt. No. 11070; filed 2/26/13] C. Objection to Motion to Abandon and Destroy Mortgage Loan Files [Filed by William Hobin] [Dkt. No. 11071; filed 2/26/13] D. Objection to Motion to Abandon and Destroy Mortgage Loan Files [Filed by Mark Zelazny] [Dkt. No. 11072; filed 2/26/13] E. Memorandum Against Abandonment and Destruction of Records [Filed by Daneford Michael Wright] [Dkt. No. 11073; filed 2/28/13] F. Objection to Motion to Authorize the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files. [Filed by Christian W. Purfield] [Dkt. No. 11074; filed 2/28/13] G. Opposition to Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Filed by El Veasta Lampley] [Dkt. No. 11075; filed 2/28/13] H. Opposition of Leslie Patrice Barnes Marks to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11076; filed 2/28/13] I. Objection to the Motion by NCLT for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files and Request for Judicial Notice [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 11077; filed 2/28/13] J. Opposition of Kimberly S. Cromwell and Karan Russell to the Motion of the New Century Liquidating Trust for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11078; filed 2/28/13]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

K. Amended Objection to the Motion by NCLT for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files and Request for Judicial Notice [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 11079; filed 3/1/13] L. The Limited Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11081; filed 3/1/13] M. Amended Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White in Part to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11083; filed 3/4/13] N. Objection to the Motion of the New Century Trust for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Filed by Robin Ann Simms] [Dkt. No. 11085; filed 3/4/13] Reply Received: A. Omnibus Reply of the New Century Liquidating Trust to Objections to Motion for Entry of an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11087; filed 3/4/13 ] Related Documents: See Agenda Item 21 below. Status: The hearing on this matter will go forward. IV. 21. MATTER GOING FORWARD: Motion of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White for Enlargement of Time to Response to the New Century Liquidating Trust Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11082; filed 3/4/13] Objection Deadline: None. Objections/Responses Received: None. Related Documents: A. The New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11067; filed 2/14/13]

130566.01600/40205659v.1

B. The Limited Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11081; filed 3/1/13] C. Amended Objection of Molly S. White and Ralph N. White in Part to the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and NonMortgage Loan Business Files [Dkt. No. 11083; filed 3/4/13] Status: The hearing on this matter will go forward. V. 22. STATUS CONFERENCE: Helen Galope v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., et al. (Adv. Pro. No. 12-51000): Motion of New Century Liquidating Trust to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint [Adv. Dkt. No. 3; filed 12/19/12] Objection Deadline: None. Objections/Responses Received: A. Answer to AP Response and Motion to Recuse [Filed by Helen Galope] [Dkt. No. 11043; filed 12/28/12] B. Response to Helen Galope's Opposition to the New Century Liquidating Trust's Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint and Opposition to Motion to Recuse [Adv. Dkt. No. 5; Main Case Dkt. No. 11050; filed 1/11/13] Related Documents: A. Memorandum of Law in Support of the New Century Liquidating Trusts Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint [Adv. Dkt. No. 4; filed 12/19/12] Status: A status conference will go forward.

130566.01600/40205659v.1

Dated: March 5, 2013

BLANK ROME LLP /s/ David W. Carickhoff David W. Carickhoff (DE No. 3715) Alan M. Root (DE No. 5427) 1201 Market Street, Suite 800 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (302) 425-6400 - Telephone (302) 425-6464 Facsimile - and HAHN & HESSEN LLP 488 Madison Avenue, 15th Floor New York, New York 10022 (212) 478-7200 - Telephone (212) 478-7400 - Facsimile Attn: Mark S. Indelicato Co-Counsel to the New Century Liquidating Trust

130566.01600/40205659v.1

Internal CM/ECF Live Database

Page 1 of 30

Multi Case Docketing : 07-10416-KJC New Century TRS Holdings, Inc.

Type: bk Chapter: 11 v Office: 1 (Delaware) Assets: y Judge: KJC Case Flag: APPEAL, MEGA, LEAD, CLMSAGNT, SealedDoc(s), CONFIRMED, MTRUNADV

10-55357-KJC Molly S. White and Ralph N. White v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. et al., a Delaware
Type: ap Lead Case: 1-07-bk-10416 Office: 1 (Delaware) Case Flag: MTRUNADV Judge: KJC

11-53199-KJC Silva v. New Century Mortgage Corporation et al

Type: ap Lead Case: 1-07-bk-10416 Office: 1 (Delaware) Case Flag: NONPREF, ANSDue, MTRUNADV Judge: KJC

12-51000-KJC Galope v. New Century Mortgage Corporation et al

Type: ap Lead Case: 1-07-bk-10416 Office: 1 (Delaware) Case Flag: SVCDue, NONPREF Judge: KJC

U.S. Bankruptcy Court District of Delaware Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was received from David W. Carickhoff entered on 3/5/2013 at 10:21 AM EST and filed on 3/5/2013 Case Name: New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. Case Number: 07-10416-KJC Document Number: 11088 Case Name: Molly S. White and Ralph N. White v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. et al., a Delaware Case Number: 10-55357-KJC Document Number: 120 Case Name: Silva v. New Century Mortgage Corporation et al Case Number: 11-53199-KJC Document Number: 46 Case Name: Galope v. New Century Mortgage Corporation et al Case Number: 12-51000-KJC Document Number: 8 Docket Text: Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing Filed by New Century Liquidating Trust. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2013 at 10:00 AM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 5th Fl., Courtroom #5, Wilmington, Delaware. (Carickhoff, David) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:New Century - Agenda _3_7_13_ _4_.pdf Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP bkecfStamp_ID=983460418 [Date=3/5/2013] [FileNumber=11493152-0] [2c25119fedcb9ab5f97ee2195d57a1fbf8c106bf810bd19c20e2d21ded195405767c 8b86e42ccea92b3be4f5a860536dfaab3d205c7edacf29c2dbe83cc1030d]] Document description:Main Document Original filename:New Century - Agenda _3_7_13_ _4_.pdf Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP bkecfStamp_ID=983460418 [Date=3/5/2013] [FileNumber=11493153-0] [522364dd4ac8d548cded62e36afcbe6847fb9e3bbf56a7d4c68ba93f1a37f93675f2 b3b391e14aee5f9a17d9cd3fd8d01d7e45c0a2818fd3ffb67782444f3891]] Document description:Main Document Original filename:New Century - Agenda _3_7_13_ _4_.pdf Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP bkecfStamp_ID=983460418 [Date=3/5/2013] [FileNumber=11493154-0] [4edb9dc01d659772bf2da97e7edb7c688b8b67a1fab5d1d8c705571398afa60f35b3 ddf56cb70b7fcdae71a045110a23b2806b2421915cb8675d20bf89c8d51e]] Document description:Main Document Original filename:New Century - Agenda _3_7_13_ _4_.pdf Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP bkecfStamp_ID=983460418 [Date=3/5/2013] [FileNumber=11493155-0] [35d99291707fd0e2d7bc538cd73c2e9cebfa58c123dee386c8ae84a2aecf8b2d09cc 0a464ccf9d6d4d130aa36d789a015f1e02cf4009d659d385fc3276661440]] 07-10416-KJC Notice will be electronically mailed to: David G. Aelvoet on behalf of Creditor Bexar County davida@publicans.com Justin R. Alberto on behalf of Defendant United Healthcare Insurance Company jalberto@bayardlaw.com, bankserve@bayardlaw.com;sbreckenridge@bayardlaw.com;lmorton@bayardlaw.com;cdavis@bayardlaw.com

https://ecf.deb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?122960149706054

3/5/2013

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE -------------------------------------------------------------------------x In re: NEW CENTURY TRS HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, et al., 1 Debtors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------x OMNIBUS REPLY OF THE NEW CENTURY LIQUIDATING TRUST TO OBJECTIONS TO MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE IMMEDIATE ABANDONMENT AND DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN MORTGAGE LOAN FILES AND NON-MORTGAGE LOAN BUSINESS FILES Alan M. Jacobs, in his capacity as Liquidating Trustee (the Trustee) to the New Century Liquidating Trust (the Trust), by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby files this omnibus reply (the Reply) to the objections (collectively, the Objections)2 Chapter 11 Case No. 07-10416 (KJC) Jointly Administered Re: D.I. 11067

The pre-confirmation Debtors were the following entities: New Century Financial Corporation (f/k/a New Century REIT, Inc.), a Maryland corporation; New Century TRS Holdings, Inc. (f/k/a new Century Financial Corporation), a Delaware corporation; New Century Mortgage Corporation (f/k/a JBE Mortgage) (d/b/a NCMC Mortgage Corporate, New Century Corporation, New Century Mortgage Ventures, LLC), a California corporation; NC Capital Corporation, a California corporation; Home123 Corporation (f/k/a The Anyloan Corporation, 1800anyloan.com, Anyloan.com), a California corporation; New Century Credit Corporation (f/k/a Worth Funding Incorporated), a California corporation; NC Asset Holding, L.P. (f/k/a NC Residual II Corporation), a Delaware limited partnership; NC Residual III Corporation, a Delaware corporation; NC Residual IV Corporation, a Delaware corporation; New Century R.E.O. Corp., a California corporation; New Century R.E.O. II Corp., a California corporation; New Century R.E.O. III Corp., a California corporation; New Century Mortgage Ventures, LLC (d/b/a Summit Resort Lending, Total Mortgage Resource, Select Mortgage Group, Monticello Mortgage Services, Ad Astra Mortgage, Midwest Home Mortgage, TRATS Financial Services, Elite Financial Services, Buyers Advantage Mortgage), a Delaware limited liability company; NC Deltex, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; NCoral, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership; and New Century Warehouse Corporation, a California corporation. Objections have been filed by Lina Cruz (Cruz) [D.I. 11069], Ann Marie DiLibero (DiLibero) [D.I. 11070], William Hobin (Hobin) [D.I. 11071], Mark Zelazny (Zelazny) [D.I. 11072], Daneford Michael Wright (Wright) [D.I. 11073], Christian Purfield (Purfield) [D.I. 11074], El Veasta Lampley (Lampley) [D.I. 11075], Leslie Marks (Marks) [D.I. 11076], Helen Galope (Galope) [D.I. 11077 & D.I. 11079], Kimberly Cromwell & Karan Russell (Cromwell and Russell) [D.I. 11078], Molly S. White and Ralph N. White (the Whites) [D.I. 11081 & 11083], and Robin Simms (Simms) [D.I. 11085] (collectively, the Objectors).

130566.01600/40205775v.1

interposed to the Motion of the New Century Liquidating Trust for an Order Authorizing the Immediate Abandonment and Destruction of Certain Mortgage Loan Files and Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files [D.I. 11067] (the Destruction Motion),3 and respectfully states as follows: REPLY 1. The Trust has been in existence since the occurrence of the Original Effective Since the Original Effective Date, in

Date nearly four and one-half (4 ) years ago.

accordance with the terms of the Modified Confirmation Order, the Trustee has maintained all documents turned over to the Trust by the Debtors, as well as all documents generated during the pendency of these chapter 11 cases (the Chapter 11 Cases). Given the

advanced stage of these Chapter 11 Cases and the relatively few issues remaining to be resolved, the Trustee is determined to take all steps necessary to ensure the expeditious closure of these Chapter 11 Cases. As part of the process of winding down the Trust, the Trustee has determined that the Trustee must begin the process of abandoning and destroying certain of the documents in its possession, the first of which are very narrow categories of documents which have no value to the Trust and are not necessary to the administration of the Chapter 11 Cases. In that vein, the Trustee filed the Destruction Motion seeking authority to destroy only (i) the Pre-2000 Loan Files, (ii) the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files, (iii) the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files, and (iv) the Post-Petition Files. While the Destruction Motion stands on its own, the Trust files this Reply to refute various inaccurate factual and legal assertions set forth in the Objections. 2. The Objections assert two (2) primary grounds in support of their arguments

in opposition to the Destruction Motion. First, the Objectors argue that the Trustee should

Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Destruction Motion.

2
130566.01600/40205775v.1

not be authorized to destroy any documentation related to the Mortgage Loans originated by the Debtors to the Objectors. Second, few of the Objectors argue that the Trustee should not be authorized to destroy any documents, as the the Objectors are under the mistaken belief that the documents in the Trusts possession may be necessary in the context of ongoing or future litigations or potential investigations. For the reasons set forth below, the Objections should be overruled, and the Destruction Motion should be granted. I. The Court Should Authorize the Abandonment of the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files 3. The majority of the Objectors primary concern is the preservation of any and

all documentation related to the Mortgage Loans originated by the Debtors to the Objectors themselves. As an initial matter, it should be noted that each of the Objectors Mortgage Loans were originated by the Debtors after 2000.4 Accordingly, despite anything the

Objectors argue to the contrary, the Objections should not be construed as opposing the Trustees request to abandon and destroy the Pre-2000 Loan Files. 4. The Objections that oppose the Trustees request to abandon and destroy the

Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files are based on the mistaken belief that the Trustee is seeking authority to abandon and destroy the only copies of the Loan Files related to their respective Mortgage Loans. See, e.g., Objections of Cruz, DiLibero, Hobin, and Zelanzy, 7-9; Objection of Simms, 3-5; Objection of Wright, p. 1. The Objectors misconstrue the relief requested. As set forth in the Destruction Motion, with respect to the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files, the Trustee seeks authority to abandon and destroy the associated hard copy Loan Files, but only if and to the extent the Trustee maintains an imaged copy

The Trusts books and records reflect that each of the Mortgage Loans originated by the Debtors for the Objectors were originated after 2000.

3
130566.01600/40205775v.1

of such Loan Files. In other words, if the Trustee does not have an imaged copy of a Post2004 Duplicate Loan File, the Trustee is not seeking authority to abandon such files. On the other hand, if the Trustee has an imaged copy of a Post-2004 Duplicate Loan File, the Trustee, by the Destruction Motion, seeks authority to abandon such files. 5. Since filing the Destruction Motion, the Trustee has received various

responses from interested parties, including the Objectors and several parties who have served upon the Trust duly issued subpoenas for production of documents (collectively, the Subpoena Parties). As the result of negotiations with those interested parties, however, the Trustee has modified his request with respect to the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files and now seeks authority to abandon such Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files, but is not seeking authority to immediately destroy such Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files at this time. Specifically, after negotiations with the Subpoena Parties, the Trustee has reached an agreement with the Subpoena Parties whereby the Trustee will request authority to abandon the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files, but will continue to maintain such Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files at the Subpoena Parties sole cost and expense.5 Accordingly, while the Trustee now seeks authority to abandon the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files (subject to the terms and conditions of the Revised Proposed Order), the Trustee will not destroy any such Post2004 Duplicate Loan Files until such time as the Subpoena Parties no longer subsidize the cost of storage of the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files. At such time, the Trustee will only destroy the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files after providing the Objectors (and any other

The Subpoena Parties have agreed to reimburse the Trust for all expenses incurred in connection with the continued maintenance of the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files, as well as any hard copy underwriting guidelines, matrices and similar documentation. Given that the Trustee has reached an agreement with the Subpoena Parties with respect to the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files and the maintenance of other hard copy materials, the Trustee intends to submit a revised proposed order (the Revised Proposed Order) consistent with the agreement of the parties.

4
130566.01600/40205775v.1

parties who have formally or informally responded to the Destruction Motion) with notice and an opportunity to assume the costs associated with the retention of the files. As a result, the Trustee will maintain any and all documents related to Mortgage Loans originated and/or serviced after 2004, including hard copy Loan Files and all documents related thereto, until such time as the Trustee notifies the Objectors in accordance with the terms of the Revised Proposed Order. Therefore, the Objections to the destruction of the hard copy Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files should be overruled, as the Trustee agrees to continue to maintain such documents and will not destroy such documents unless and until the Trustee notifies interested parties, including the Objectors, of the Trustees intent to destroy the Post-2004 Duplicate Loan Files and gives them the opportunity to assume the retention costs. 6. Certain of the Objections also appear to be based on the mistaken belief that

the Trust maintains original copies of their Loan Files. See, e.g., Objection of Wright, p. 1; Objection of Simms, 3; Objection of the Whites, 24, 31. Again, the Objectors

misinterpret the explanations set forth in the Destruction Motion concerning the relief requested. Specifically, as set forth in the Destruction Motion, the documents in the Trusts possession concerning or relating to borrowers Mortgage Loans are not original documents. Rather, it was the Debtors practice in the ordinary course to deliver the original Loan Files for each Mortgage Loan originated or serviced by the Debtors to the applicable Securitization Trusts, third party purchaser, or servicer. The hard copy Loan Files in the Trusts possession, therefore, are duplicate or branch copies of Loan Files, the original copies of which have long since been transferred to third parties. Accordingly, the

5
130566.01600/40205775v.1

Objections based on the mistaken belief that the Trust maintains original copies of Loan Files should be overruled as having no basis in fact. 7. Notwithstanding the Trustees position that the Objections should be

overruled, to the extent the Trustee has not previously provided copies of documents relating to each respective Objectors Mortgage Loans, as an accommodation to such Objectors, the Trustee is willing to make a reasonable and diligent search for documents related to the Objectors Mortgage Loans where such documents reasonably would be expected to be found and produce such documents to the Objectors on an individual basis. The Trustee notes, however, that the Trust has already provided documents in its possession concerning or relating to the Mortgage Loans of Purfield,6 Cromwell, and Russell,7 and the Trustee does not intend to re-produce such documents. As the Objections are based upon a misunderstanding of the relief requested and given that the Trustee is willing to produce such documents to the Objectors, the Objections should be overruled. II. The Trustee Should Be Authorized to Abandon and Destroy the Pre-2000 Loan Files, the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files, and the Post-Petition Files 8. The Objectors also challenge the relief requested on the basis that (i) they are

involved in litigation concerning Mortgage Loans allegedly originated and/or serviced by the Debtors prior to the Petition Date, see Objections of Cruz, DiLibero, Hobin, and Zelazny, 4; Objection of Cromwell and Russell, 2; Objection of Marks, 5; Objection of Lampley, p. 3; Objection of Wright, p. 1, Objection of the Whites, 32; or (ii) the Objectors
6

See Order Denying Christian W. Purfields Emergency Motion Without Prejudice [D.I. 10827, 4/5/12], pursuant to which the Trustee agreed to provide Purfield with a copy of his Loan File. As the Court is aware, an evidentiary hearing to consider the threshold issue of whether Cromwell and Russell should be permitted to file a late claim in these Chapter 11 Cases was conducted on May 23, 2012 and, with respect to Russell only, was completed on July 12, 2012. Prior to the evidentiary hearings, the Trustee provided all documents (including copies of their respective Loan Files) in its possession concerning or relating to the Mortgage Loans originated by the Debtors to both Cromwell and Russell.

6
130566.01600/40205775v.1

believe such documents may be relevant to some future litigation or investigation by a governmental authority. See Objection of Lampley, p. 2; Objection of Cromwell and

Russell, 3; Objection of Marks, 6. As a result of such ongoing litigation or potential litigation and/or potential investigations, the Objectors assert that the Trust should not be authorized to destroy any documents in its possession. Russell, 3; Objection of Marks, p. 1. 9. At the outset, it should be noted that, other than the few Objections which See Objection of Cromwell &

assert that there should be a blanket prohibition from destroying any documents, there have been no objections, formal or informal, to the destruction of the Pre-2000 Loan Files (as discussed infra) or the Post-Petition Files.8 The Objectors have not articulated a basis for prohibiting the destruction of the Pre-2000 Loan Files or the Post-Petition Files, and, as set forth more fully in the Destruction Motion, such files are not necessary to complete the administration of these Chapter 11 Cases. Accordingly, the Trustee submits that there is no dispute as to the Trustees request for authorization to abandon and destroy the Pre-2000 Loan Files and the Post-Petition Files. 10. With respect to the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files, certain of the

Objections assert that the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files may contain evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the Debtors, and, as a result, such documents may be necessary in some future litigation. See, e.g., Objection of Cromwell & Russell, 3; Objection of Marks, p. 1; Objection of the Whites, . This argument, however, is based on nothing more than pure speculation and has no basis in fact. The Objectors argument is based on the mere

The Trustee acknowledges that the Whites Objection specifically objects to the destruction of the PostPetition Files. However, given the breadth of the Whites Objection, the Trustee believes the Whites Objection is more appropriately construed as an objection to the destruction of all documents.

7
130566.01600/40205775v.1

possibility that an essential document may be found within the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files for use in a hypothetical investigation to be commenced at some future time. Essentially, the Objectors would have the Trust maintain the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files for an indefinite time period,9 notwithstanding the fact that the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files have been maintained for nearly seven (7) years, and the Trust has had no recent requests for the production of the types of document contained in the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files. Moreover, in response to various (completed) investigations by the SEC and various other governmental bodies as well as the Examiner, the Trustee has produced an inordinate amount of documents and has complied fully with all such investigations. Any and all such investigations have long since concluded, and the

documents produced in accordance with those investigations are not the subject of this Motion. The Trustee should not be required to continue to maintain documents based on the Objectors erroneous understanding of the facts surrounding the various investigations that have been undertaken with respect to the Debtors operations. 11. Notwithstanding the Objectors arguments, in order to move these Chapter 11

Cases toward closure, the Trustee must begin the process of abandoning and destroying documents, including the very narrow categories of documents defined as Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files. As set forth in the Destruction Motion, the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files include, but are not limited to, accounting records, marketing and sales files, human resources files, personnel files, closed/settled litigation files, unfunded/rejected loan
9

The Trustee notes that the Whites Objection to the destruction of documents is inherently inconsistent with the Whites Objection to the Trusts Motion for an Order Extending the Trusts Termination Date Through and Including August 1, 2015 (the Trust Extension Motion). On the one hand, the Whites argue that the Trust should not be permitted to destroy documents. Yet, in their objection to the Trust Extension Motion, the Whites oppose the extension of the time period in which the Trustee may complete the administration of these Chapter 11 Cases, making no mention as to the fate of the documents which are the subject of the Destruction Motion.

8
130566.01600/40205775v.1

applications, and other general office and business records. The Trustee believes that the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files have no value to the Trust or any party,10 as they pertain to the Debtors operations, as distinct from the Debtors Mortgage Loan origination and servicing business. The Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files have not been the subject of any recent requests by any parties, including the Objectors, and the continued maintenance of such Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files constitutes a burden on the estate with no corresponding benefit to the Trust (or, for that matter, to any party). Finally, the Objectors have failed to explain how or why they might need to access the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files and how or why such files are relevant to their pending litigations. 12. The Trustee submits that the Trusts progress toward closure of the Chapter

11 Cases should not be hindered due to the speculative, unfounded belief that the NonMortgage Loan Business Files may contain documents of interest to the Objectors. Accordingly, the Destruction Motion should be granted, and the Court should authorize the immediate abandonment and destruction of the Non-Mortgage Loan Business Files in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Revised Proposed Order, as such authorization is a necessary step in completing the administration of the Trust. 13. Finally, consistent with the Trustees obligations under the terms of the

Modified Confirmation Order, the Trust has not destroyed any documents that were turned over by the Debtors or that have been generated during the pendency of these Chapter 11 Cases. As a result, many parties, including some of the Objectors, as well as the Subpoena

10

The Trustee vehemently disputes that the Destruction Motion is based upon a malicious attempt to destroy evidence to the detriment of the Objectors and other former borrowers of the Debtors. See, e.g., Objection of Marks, 8-10; Objection of Galope, p. 2-3.

9
130566.01600/40205775v.1

Parties,11 have utilized the Trust as a resource for the production of documents. However, it should be noted that the Trust is merely a secondary source for copies of documents which may be of interest to the Objectors (and other parties), and the Trustee maintains that any documents related to the Objectors individual Mortgage Loans are more appropriately sought from other parties, particularly the current owner or servicer of the Mortgage Loan. Nonetheless, as indicated above, to the extent the Trustee has not previously done so, the Trustee is willing to provide to the Objectors any documents in its possession concerning or relating to Mortgage Loans originated to the Objectors. Accordingly, the Objectors will not suffer any harm if the relief requested in the Destruction Motion (as modified by the Revised Proposed Order) is granted because the Trustee will turn over to the Objectors any and all documents concerning or related to their respective Mortgage Loans. As such, the

destruction of the files set forth in the Revised Proposed Order will not lead to any spoliation claims. Moreover, the Objections have not set forth any legitimate factual basis to challenge the Trustees request to abandon and destroy the Pre-2000 Loan Files, the NonMortgage Loan Business Files, or the Post-Petition Files. Accordingly, the Objections should be overruled. III. Service 14. The Objection of Marks alleges that the Destruction Motion was deliberately

not served upon any homeowners. See Objection of Marks, p. 2. The Trustee vehemently

11

The Trustee notes that the Trust has been served with several dozen duly issued subpoenas in recent years, and the Trustee has endeavored to comply with each subpoena consistent with his legal obligation to respond, notwithstanding the substantial cost and burden to the Trust in responding to such subpoenas. However, many of the documents sought pursuant to subpoenas are more appropriately sought from other parties. Accordingly, the Trust submits that, while the Trust will not disregard its legal obligation to respond to duly issued subpoenas, the Trust must be permitted to begin this process of abandoning and destroying documents, so that the Trust is in a position to close these Chapter 11 Cases as expeditiously as possible following the resolution of the remaining issues.

10
130566.01600/40205775v.1

disputes that service of the Motion was improper. In an effort to provide notice to each and every party who has expressed an interest in any of the Debtors records, the Trustee provided notice of the Motion to: (i) the pre-Original Effective Date Bankruptcy Rule 2002 list, (ii) the current Bankruptcy Rule 2002 list, (iii) any parties who have served duly issued subpoenas on the Trust or who provided the Trust with a do not destroy notice, and (iv) holders of disputed claims.12 Accordingly, Marks allegation that the

Trustee did not provide notice of the Destruction Motion to any former borrowers is simply false. Moreover, the Trustee submits that the notice that was provided was over-inclusive, as the Destruction Motion was noticed to many parties who likely did not have an interest in the Unnecessary Files. IV. Other Allegations 15. In addition to the objections to the relief requested in the Destruction Motion,

certain of the Objections assert various factual and legal allegations against the Debtors and the Trust. Notwithstanding the fact that such allegations are not proper in the context of a response to the Destruction Motion, for the avoidance of doubt, the Trustee vehemently refutes, denies, and disagrees with the balance of the allegations contained in the Objections, including, without limitation, the Objections of Lampley, Marks, Simms and Galope. Specifically, and without limiting the foregoing sentence, the Trustee denies (i) Lampleys allegation of bankruptcy fraud (see Objection of Lampley, p. 2), Marks allegations that she has claims in these Chapter 11 Cases (see Objection of Marks, 1), that

12

The Trustee notes that there are several former borrowers of the Debtors who hold disputed claims in these Chapter 11 Cases.

11
130566.01600/40205775v.1

she is entitled to sue the Debtors in California state court13 (see Objection of Marks, 9), or that she is entitled to attorneys' fees (see Objection of Marks, 22), Simms allegations that the Trust failed to respond to RESPA requests for information (see Objection of Simms, 6), Cromwell and Russells and the Whites allegations that the Trustees request to abandon and destroy the Unnecessary Files violates state and/or federal law (see Objection of Cromwell and Russell, 7-17; Objection of the Whites, 30-31), and the Whites allegations that the Trustee is engaged in some conspiracy to destroy evidence relevant to any ongoing litigations. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank]

13

The Trustee notes that this Court has reiterated on several different occasions and in several different Orders of the Court that Marks is not entitled to sue the Debtors in any court, other than to quiet title.

12
130566.01600/40205775v.1

WHEREFORE, the Trust respectfully requests that the Court overrule the Objections to the Destruction Motion, grant the relief requested in the Destruction Motion (as modified by the Revised Proposed Order), and grant such other and further relief as it deems just and proper. Dated: March 4, 2013 BLANK ROME LLP

By:/s/ David W. Carickhoff David W. Carickhoff (No. 3715) Alan M. Root (No. 5427) 1201 Market Street, Suite 800 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (302) 425-6400 - Telephone (302) 425-6464 - Facsimile - and HAHN & HESSEN LLP 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 478-7200 - Telephone (212) 478-7400 - Facsimile Attn: Mark S. Indelicato, Esq. Christopher J. Hunker, Esq. Co-Counsel to the New Century Liquidating Trust

13
130566.01600/40205775v.1