Question re. Motion to Extend Time To File Dischargeability Complaint - Is FRBP 4007(c) Jurisdictional And/Or Must it Be
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:37 pm
Within the 9th Cir., can someone clarify whether FRBP 4007(c) & 9006(b)(3),
as it concerns a motion to extend time to file a dischargeability complaint,
requires that the extension order itself have to be entered before the 60
day deadline expires or is it enough to file the motion before the deadline
expires? It appears the 9th Circuit has a strict interpretation of the 60
day deadline, so even if 4007(c) is not jurisdictional, it seems that the
bar date may still be strictly construed. Any thoughts and clarifications
on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Jeffrey Hsu, Esq. | JCH Law Firm
1031 S. Garfield Ave. | Alhambra, CA 91801
Phone & Fax: 626-999-5959
jhsu@jchfirm.com |
www.jchfirm.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information protected by
the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, or other privileges.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended
recipient but do not wish to receive communications through this medium,
please so advise the sender immediately.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.