El Juez / Vivian Writes: ( está en el foro americano)
This motion is very concise, well-written, on point, and compelling. (Good work, Ashby Geddes and Susman Godfrey.)
As ya'll may recall, I was very distressed, depressed, disappointed and amazed that Judge W took it upon herself to be the ultimate "expert" in this case, relieving the debtor of it's affirmative obligation to actually present competent, credible (LOL!) and admissible evidence in support of it's burden of proof that the POR (and the GSA) was "fair and reasonable". That may be how Judge Judy handles a Small Claims Court case on TV, but where thousands of people and tens of billions of dollars are involved in the largest bank bankruptcy in history? No way. Big mistake, IMHO. She was too focused on final resolution rather than quality control and due process.
This motion to certify calls her on that, and persuasively demonstrates that she should certify the matter for direct appeal to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal because the circumstances satisfy all four possible grounds for certification. It is her duty to acknowledge that fact (on at least one of the four possible grounds) in order to expedite resolution of novel issues central to the ultimate resolution of the case. I'm sure she will, even if/though she thinks she made the correct decision.
A bonus to granting certification: It puts more pressure on all the parties to work toward settlement, which I believe is her ultimate goal.
P.S. I've been in a similar position on many occasions over the years, and have almost always certified the issue on appeal, except where there was a technical deficiency in the request. That doesn't exist here, except arguably on the issue of "finality" of her decision. In my opinion, even if this could be construed as an "interlocutory decree", it is so central to the ultimate outcome of the case it is/should be still immediately worthy of appeal
