Sei sulla pagina 1di 16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 13-23386-CIV-MARRA (APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.

10-26423-BKC-AJC)

INFO LINK COMMUNICATION SERVICES, INC., PRONTO GROUP, LLC, PRONTO GROUP, INC., and INFOLINK PANAMA, S.A., Appellants, v. INFOLINK GLOBAL CORPORATION, Appellee. /

SUGGESTION OF MOOTNESS, NOTICE OF EFFECTUATION OF TRANSFERS AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW INFOLINK COMMUNICATION SERVICES, INC. (Communication), PRONTO GROUP, LLC (Pronto LLC), PRONTO GROUP, INC. (Pronto Inc.), and INFOLINK PANAMA, S.A. (Infolink Panama), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files the following Suggestion of Mootness, Notice of Effectuation of Transfers, and Memorandum of Law related to the status of certain assets of the movants, currently under the control of Infolink Global Inc., previously governed by the now reversed Confirmation Order [DE 898]1, and state the following:
1

For purposes of clarity, citations to documents filed in the bankruptcy courts docket in Case No. 10-26423-BKC-AJC, shall be cited to as [DE __]. Documents filed in the

INTRODUCTION 1. On February 2, 2012, this Court confirmed the Second Amended Plan

of Reorganization Proposed by James C. Kurzweg and Infolink Equity Group (the Infolink Global Plan) [DE 863], which became effective immediately as a result of this Courts waiver of the 14-day stay otherwise applicable under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3020(e) and authorized the proponents to consummate the transactions contemplated by the Plan upon the orders entry. [DE 898 11, 27]. This confirmation order notably contained numerous embedded judgments conveying title to certain assets of the movant to a newly formed Florida entity, Infolink Global Corporation (Global). 2. One of the entities whose assets were transferred pursuant to the

Confirmation Order that was never a party to the bankruptcy proceeding, nor the adversary proceeding that was dismissed with prejudice, challenged this Courts jurisdiction to transfer its assets on the basis that this Court never established jurisdiction. On February 15, 2012, an Notice of Appeal was timely filed. [DE 910]. 3. The District Court initially affirmed this Courts Confirmation Order

[AD 37] which was followed by a Motion for Reconsideration [AD 38]. After
related adversary proceeding in Case No. 11-01885-AJC, shall be cited to as [BKC, ADV __]. Documents that were filed in the District Court docket in Case No. 12-21339-CIV-MARRA, shall be cited as [AD __].

ordering Infolink Global to file a response, the District Court entered its Order on July 29, 2013, which stated the following: Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Appellant Prontocomms Motion for Rehearing (DE 38) is GRANTED. The Courts order affirming the bankruptcy courts Order Confirming Second Amended Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization for Debtors, Infolink Group, Inc. and Infolink Information Services, Inc., Proposed by Creditor James C. Kurzweg and Infolink Equity Group (DE 37) is VACATED. The bankruptcy courts Order Confirming Second Amended Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization for Debtors, Infolink Group, Inc. and Infolink Information Services, Inc., Proposed by Creditor James C. Kurzweg and Infolink Equity Group is REVERSED. This case is REMANDED to the bankruptcy court for the limited purpose of making a factual finding as to the relationship between Leary and Prontocomm. After the bankruptcy court makes its factual finding, it should issue a new final judgment as it deems appropriate. If an appeal is taken from the new final judgment, the appellant shall advise the Clerk that the new appeal is related to the present appeal. [AD 41, at p. 2] (emphasis in original and additional emphasis supplied). 4. On August 13, 2013, the automatic stay imposed by Federal Rule of

Bankruptcy Procedure 8017(a), which mandates that [j]udgments of the district court or the bankruptcy appellate panel are stayed until the expiration of 14 days after entry, unless otherwise ordered by the district court or the bankruptcy appellate panel, expired. On August 29, 2013, the appeal period has run and no party has challenged the District Courts Order Reversing Confirmation Order. Hence, the July 29, 2013 order REVERSING the Confirmation Order is an unappealable, irreversible Final Order.

5.

On September 3, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order [DE

973] enjoining movants engaging in activities to related to the restitution of their assets under the control of Infolink Global, Inc. On September 18, 2013, movants appealed this injunction to this honorable court which has held and currently maintains jurisdiction over this issue. Despite the pendency of this appeal, and the clear jurisdictional issues, the bankruptcy court entered multiple subsequent orders extending this injunction. The last one [DE 1027] expired on November 18, 2013. 6. The purpose of this instant filing is: (1) to notify Infolink Global Inc.

and any interested parties that movants will be once again initiating restitution activities related to its assets currently under the control of Infolink Global Inc., providing them with an opportunity to petition for another injunction, despite the fact that the law does not provide them an entitlement to one; and (2) to put all interested parties on notice that, by operation of the District Courts Order Reversing Confirmation Order, Communication, Infolink Panama, Pronto LLC, and Pronto Inc. will immediately seek to effectuate the return of all property that passed title pursuant to the null-and-void Confirmation Order. I. JURISDICTION

This honorable court, sitting in an appellate capacity, currently retains exclusive jurisdiction over the matter of the entitlement to Infolink Global Inc. of an injunction against movants. It is notable that despite this and during the pendency

of this appeal, the bankruptcy court has extended the injunction on three separate occasions. II. THE REVERSED CONFIRMATION ORDER IS A NULLITY AND THE PARTIES TO THIS PROCEEDING MUST BE RETURNED TO THEIR STATUS QUO ANTE BEFORE CONFIRMATION OF THE PLAN. An order or judgment reversed on appeal is without any validity, force, or effect. Keller v. Hall, 111 F.2d 129, 131 (9th Cir. 1940) (quoting Butler v. Eaton, 141 U.S. 240, 244 (1891)); see also Hartunian v. Racusin, 120 Fed. Appx 698, 701 (9th Cir. 2005) (award was a nullity once it was reversed on appeal). A judgment that has been reversed on appeal is a nullity. Pottgen v. Missouri State High Sch. Activities Assn, 103 F.3d 720, 724 (8th Cir. 1997) (citing Pedigo v. P.A.M. Transp., Inc., 98 F.3d 396, 398 (8th Cir. 1996)). As a result, the well settled rule is that a reversed decree [is] no longer of any force or effect. The parties [are] in precisely the same situation as though no decree had been entered. Kaplan v. Joseph, 125 F.2d 602, 606 (7th Cir. 1942) (citation omitted). These authorities make clear that the District Courts Order reversing this Courts Confirmation Order renders the Confirmation Order a nullity. Accordingly, the parties return to this Court on remand as though the Confirmation Order was

never entered by this Court. 3

It was only by virtue of the now-invalidated

Confirmation Order that all of the property of the estate [vested] in the debtor. 11 U.S.C. 1141(b). The direct and immediate legal consequence District Courts Order Reversing the Confirmation Order is that any parties who acquired property as a result of the null Confirmation Order no longer have a right to that property. As such, the parties must be returned to their status quo ante before the Infolink Plan was confirmed. See In re Fours On Seventh, LLC, 251 B.R. 784, 793 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Reversing the Bankruptcy Courts confirmation of the Plan would cause a chain reaction that returns the Property to Debtor and the financing to 330 Acquisition and Regency.); Central States, Se. & Sw. Areas Pension Fund v. Central Transport, Inc., 68 B.R. 95, 99 (M.D.N.C. 1986) (reversal of bankruptcy courts confirmation order would have the effect of invalidating the plan itself). Unquestionably, the reversal of the Confirmation Order automatically restores the parties to their status quo ante before the Confirmation Order was entered. Fortunately, unlike many other cases where a confirmation order is reversed, here, it is simple for the Movants to effectuate the legal effect of the

The only exceptions to the parties return to a pre-confirmation posture before this Court are the District Courts conclusions are that (1) confirmation of the Plan did not render the appeal equitably moot; (2) the Appellant had standing to file its appeal; and (3) that there is insufficient record evidence to support a legal conclusion that the Appellant was adequately represented in these proceedings by virtue of Prier J. Leary, IIIs involvement in these cases.

District Courts reversal because the assets in question are internet domains, cash, a commercial lease, customer information, and intellectual property. This is very similar scenario that has already been addressed by the Tenth Circuit: reversal of the Joint Plan will not undo any complex transactions. SMDI primarily seeks to undo the sale of the domain name to ConsumerInfo, which is not likely to be particularly complex or troublesome. See Nordhoff Invs., 258 F.3d at 185-86 (discussing the complexity of the post-confirmation transactions and whether unscrambling those transactions would be difficult enough to counsel against reaching the merits of the appellants appeal). In re Paige, 584 F.3d 1327 (10th Cir. 2009). Further, Infolink Global was a party to both the bankruptcy case and the appeal and there are no innocent third-parties involved who relied on the Plans confirmation that will be harmed as a result of the Movants effectuating the return of their property. See Paige, 584 F.3d at 1344 (In the first place, as noted above, because of ConsumerInfo's pivotal role in the bankruptcy proceedings, it is hard to consider it a third party or at least an innocent third party.). In any event, [c]ourts can and do order divestiture or damages in situations where business deals or bankruptcy plans have been wrongly consummated, In re Res. Tech. Corp., 430 F.3d 884, 886-87 (7th Cir.2005). Lastly, on the issue of reversal, it is notable that this court has stated in this completely separate case, over two months later, after its appellate order became final and irreversible, that it did not intend to return the parties to the positions they

occupied before the bankruptcy court entered its confirmation order, its July 29, 2013 order of REVERSAL rendered the confirmation order a nullity, and did exactly that (cite). II. THE APPEAL OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURTS INJUNCTION IS NOW MOOT The last extension of the Bankruptcy Courts order enjoining the movants from restitution activities expired on November 18, 2013, rendering this appeal moot. III. A NEW CONFIRMATION ORDER CANNOT TRANSFER

ASSETS TO INFOLINK GLOBAL Even if a new confirmation order were to be entered in the bankruptcy case, conveyance of assets can only be accomplished through an adversary proceeding pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7001. The 11th Circuit weighs in as follows (In re Atlanta Retail, Inc., 456 F.3d 1277, 1284 (11th Cir. 2006)):

Any suit Kodak filed to "recover money or property" against a person other than the debtor would have to be filed as an adversary proceeding, rather than be raised within the context of a contested proceeding. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7001 (1).

Notably, an adversary case was filed to do just that and was dismissed with prejudice. It is well founded that a dismissal with prejudice is a full adjudication on

the merits. Hence, Infolink Global has absolute no legal claim or mechanism to make claim to these assets. IV. ASSETS It is well settled in that when a judgment (the confirmation order) is reversed on appeal the appellant is entitled to restitution of all things taken from him under the judgment. After reversal the respondent stands in the position of a trustee of appellant of the property obtained under the judgment. Restitution may be sought in the same or in an independent action. The same rule should apply where a judgment has been vacated by a trial court. Movants assets were conveyed to Infolink Global Inc. by virtue of the now void confirmation order, and is now entitled to have its property restored to him by his adversary (Sundie, 253 So.2d 857, supra; Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. State, 77 Fla. 571, 82 So. 136 (Fla. 1919)). Upon filing of the mandate of the reviewing court, movants have authority to take such further proceedings as may be appropriate to perfect the restitution of their assets (Smith v. Smith, 118 So.2d 204 (Fla. 1960)). V. NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES OF MOVANTS INTENT TO EFFECTUATE TRANSFERS. MOVANTS ARE ENTITLED TO RESTITUION OF THEIR

Based on the foregoing, all property that passed title to the Reorganized Debtor, Infolink Global, pursuant to the null-and-void Confirmation Order must be

immediately returned to its respective owners by operation of law. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT YOU ARE RECEIVING THIS NOTICE BECAUSE YOU EITHER RECEIVED ASSETS THAT MUST BE RETURNED OR YOU MUST IMMEDIATELY EFFECTUATE THE TRANSFERS SET FORTH BELOW: i. GODADDY.COM, LLC, the internet domain registrar responsible for registering the domains specified below, is hereby notified to immediately transfer the following internet domains to be held in trust by Xander Law Group, P.A., as the agent of Infolink Panama. A copy of the documentation supporting Infolink Panamas ownership of these domains since June of 2005 is attached hereto as Exhibit A: a. ServerPronto.com; b. Infolink.com; c. Colopronto.com; d. Cloudpronto.com; e. Mpronto.com; f. Serverprontouniversity.com; g. Serverpronto.net (the serverpronto.net domain was

transferred to Infolink Global pursuant to this Courts Order Granting Re-Organized Debtors Ex Parte Motion to Authorize and Direct CSL Computer Service Langenback

GMBH d/b/a/ Joker.com to Transfer serverpronto.net Web Domain to Reorganized Debtor Pursuant to Confirmed Plan and Confirmation Order [DE 939]). h. Any other internet domains not listed above but which were transferred to Infolink Global by virtue of the Confirmation Order. ii. 22 STREET KM LLC, the owner of property located at 1901 N.W. 22nd street (the Premises), which is the owner of a commercial building subject to a 10 year lease located at 1901 N.W. 22nd Street, Miami, Florida 33142. The Premises is the physical location where the servers that comprise Infolink Communications web hosting business are housed. The lease of the Premises is Pronto Group LLC (see lease agreement attached as Exhibit B). By operation of the District Courts Order Reversing Confirmation Order, 22 STREET KM LLC must immediately cause possession of the Premises to be restored to Pronto Group LLC. iii. ALL CURRENT EMPLOYEES OF INFOLINK GLOBAL

CORPORATION, including but not limited to, Jonathan Ham, Manuel Diaz, Cesar Durand, and James C. Kurzweg are directed to immediately cease any and all unauthorized activities to the extent

that those activities relate to the Premises leased by Pronto Group, LLC and operated by Infolink Communication Services, Inc., at 1901 N.W. 22nd Street, Miami, Florida 33142. Please be further advised that the current employees of Infolink Global have no authority to operate or conduct any business related to the internet domains presently owned by Infolink Panama (ServerPronto.com; Infolink.com; Colopronto.com; Cloudpronto.com; Mpronto.com;

Serverprontouniversity.com; Serverpronto.net), and must refrain from any and all communication or interaction with the customers and equipment of Infolink Communication Services. Exhibits C and D are affidavits executed by current Infolink Global employees Jonathan Ham and Manuel Diaz which attest to the fact that Infolink Communications, Inc. was the company that continuously operated the ServerPronto.com dedicated server business since for the entire time of their employ, which was 11.5 years and 5 years respectively. In addition to the affidavits referenced above, Composite Exhibit E contains 5 additional affidavits executed by individuals that were employed by Infolink Communication Services, Inc. and attest to the fact that the pre-confirmation operating company was Infolink Communications, Inc.

Based upon the lease agreement concerning the Premises attached as Exhibit B, the affidavits of Jonathan Ham and Manuel Diaz attached as Exhibits C and D respectively, and the 5 affidavits comprising Composite Exhibit E which attest to the fact that Infolink Communication Services, Inc. was the pre-confirmation operator of the ServerPronto.com business, immediate possession of the Premises and immediate turnover of the operation of the ServerPronto.com web hosting business has been effectuated pursuant to the District Courts reversal of the bankruptcy courts Confirmation Order, and the rights of the pre-confirmation owners set forth above are restored by virtue of same. The failure to comply with this Notice may result in the issuance of writs of execution for restitution and may subject non-compliant parties to contempt of court. WHEREFORE, Movants, Infolink Communication Services, Inc., Infolink Panama, S.A., Pronto Group, Inc., and Pronto Group, LLC, have hereby provided this Court with Movants notice of effectuation of transfers, and all recipients of the foregoing Notice have hereby been advised of Movants immediate rights to effectuate the transfers discussed herein. This being said Movants will not be commencing collections activities for a period of 10 days from the filing of this pleading, to allow Infolink Global Inc. or any interested parties to petition this honorable court for relief prior to movants restitution of its assets. Accordingly, movant requests this court not to close this appeal should yet another injunction be

entered. Should no injunction be entered, movant petitions this court for closure of this appeal, and an entrance of a Writ of Mandamus preventing the entrance of further similar injunctions.
Respectfully submitted,

By:

______

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that, on this 11th day of December, 2013 the foregoing PostRemand Status Report, Notice of Effectuation of Transfers, and Memorandum Of Law was served on all parties in interest via CM/ECF and/or to: GoDaddy.com LLC By U.S Mail: Legal Department 14455 North Hayden Rd. Suite 219 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 And By Email: legal@godaddy.com Banco Popular North America By U.S Mail: c/o Broad and Cassel 2 S. Biscayne Blvd. 21st Floor Miami, FL 33131 And By Email: mraymond@broadandcassel.com And By Fax: 305-373-9443 Alan J. Marcus Esq. By U.S Mail: 20803 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 301 Aventura, FL 33180 And By Email: alan@alanjmarcus.com And By Fax: 305-937-1857

Mr. Chaim Kleinman Mr. Ami Kleinman By U.S Mail: 22 Street KM LLC 301 174th St. Suite 2214 Sunny Isles Beach, FL And By Email: amikl@yahoo.com

Jonathan Ham By U.S Mail: 279 NW 81 Terrace Coral Springs, FL 33071 And By Email: jham@infolink.com, jonh@infolink.com James Kurzweg By U.S Mail: 1521 Alton Road, Box 449 Miami Beach, FL 33139 And By Email: chrisk@infolink.com Intuit, Inc. By U.S Mail: c/o Gregg M. Ficks, Esq. Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP One Ferry Building, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94111-4213 And By Email: gficks@coblentzlaw.com and gmf@cpdb.com American Express Bank FSB By U.S Mail: c/o Becket and Lee LLP POB 3001 Malvern, PA 19355

Manuel Diaz By U.S Mail: 1963 NW 22nd St. Miami, FL 33142 And By Email: mdiaz@infolink.com

Cesar Durand By U.S Mail: 15421 SW 133 Pl, #906 Miami, FL 33177 And By Email: cdurand@infolink.com John Arrastia, Jr By U.S Mail: Arrastia, Capote & Phang LLP 80 SW 8 St #2310 Miami, FL 33130 And By Email: john@arrastia-law.com And By Fax: 786-866-6358 George Brown By U.S Mail: Nathan G Mancuso 7777 Glades Rd # 100 Boca Raton, FL 33434 And By Email: ngm@mancuso-law.com

FPL FiberNet LLC By U.S Mail: c/o Rachel Budke, Esq. 700 Universe Blvd Juno Beach, FL 33408 And By Email: rachel_budke@fpl.com And By Fax: 561-691-7103

Fowler White Burnett, P.A. By U.S Mail: Ronald G. Neiwir 1395 Brickell Avenue 14th Floor Miami, FL 33131 And By Email: rgn@fowler-white.com And By Fax: 305-789-9201

Infolink Global Corporation By U.S Mail: c/o Nathan G Mancuso 7777 Glades Rd #100 Boca Raton, FL 33434

Mitchell Helfer By U.S Mail: c/o Kenneth Drake Esq 150 Alhambra Cir Coral Gables, FL 33134

Infolink Group, Inc. By U.S Mail: 3109 Grand Ave # 455 Miami, FL 33133 Thompson Lykes By U.S Mail: Jeffrey M Berman 201 S Biscayne Blvd # 1700 Miami, FL 33131 And By Email: jberman@klugerkaplan.com Office of the US Trustee By U.S Mail:Johanna armagold 51 S.W. 1st Ave. Suite 1204 Miami, FL 33130 And By Email: USTPRegion21.MM.ECF@usdoj.gov Patrick Scott By U.S Mail: GrayRobinson, P.A. 401 East Las Olas Blvd. Suite 1850 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 And By Email: patrick.scott@gray-robinson.com And By Fax: 954/761-8112

Prieur J. Leary, III By U.S Mail: 390 Alton Rd, Box 4 Miami Beach, FL 33139 Pedro Garcia Menocal By U.S Mail: c/o Neil Rubin 1130 Washington Ave 4th Floor Miami Beach, FL 33139

SRX Trading, Inc. By U.S Mail: c/o Jason H. Weber 300 S. Biscayne Blvd. Suite 1802 Miami, FL 33131 And By Email: jason@xanderlawgroup.com Infolink Panama S.A. By U.S Mail: c/o Jason H. Weber 300 S. Biscayne Blvd. Suite 1802 Miami, FL 33131 And By Email: jason@xanderlawgroup.com

Potrebbero piacerti anche