Legal Opinion
In Re Qimonda Richmond, LLC
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware
Decided August 3, 2010No. 19-10511Published
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION 1
MARY F. WALRATH, Bankruptcy Judge.
Before the Court is the Debtor’s objection to the Motion of Google, Inc. (“Goo gle”) for allowance of an administrative claim. For the following reasons, the Court sustains the Debtor’s objection and denies the Motion.
1. BACKGROUND
Qimonda North America Corp. (“the Debtor”) was a manufacturer of, inter alia, memory modules. The Debtor sold memory modules to Google, Inc., pursuant to purchase orders placed by Google.
On February 20, 2009, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Shortly thereafter, Google…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Reading Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- In Re Pacific Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- LaPlace v. BriereNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2009
- Park County Implement Co. v. CraigWyoming Supreme Court · 1964
- In Re Women First Healthcare, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2005
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.