settlement.motion file stamped

Motion to Approve Settlement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

IN RE: 1SOLTECH, INC. Debtor

Case No. 14-42187 Chapter 7

MOTION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 9019

NO HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED ON THIS MOTION UNLESS A WRITTEN OBJECTION IS FILED WITH THE CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT AND SERVED UPON THE PARTY FILING THIS PLEADING WITHIN TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS FROM DATE OF SERVICE UNLESS THE COURT SHORTENS OR EXTENDS THE TIME FOR FILING SUCH OBJECTION. IF NO OBJECTION IS TIMELY SERVED AND FILED, THIS PLEADING SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE UNOPPOSED, AND THE COURT MAY ENTER AN ORDER GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT. IF AN OBJECTION IS FILED AND SERVED IN A TIMELY MANNER, THE COURT WILL THEREAFTER SET A HEARING. IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, YOUR OBJECTION MAY BE STRICKEN. THE COURT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SET A HEARING ON ANY MATTER. COMES NOW, Mark A. Weisbart, in his official capacity as Chapter 7 Trustee of the

bankruptcy estate of 1SolTech, Inc. (the “Trustee”), and hereby files this Motion to Approve

Settlement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 (this “Motion to Approve

Settlement”), and in support respectfully state as follows:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Trustee by this Motion to Approve Settlement seek the Court’s approval of a compromise

of the State of Texas’s claims against the bankruptcy estate pursuant to Rule 9019 of the Rules of

Bankruptcy Procedure (“Rule 9019”). Texas, through an underlying enforcement action in

Travis County District Court, has asserted claims against the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate under

Texas law which stem from the Debtor’s violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices

Consumer Protection Act, TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.46, et seq. (the “DTPA”). The Trustee

and Texas have reached a settlement of Texas’s DTPA claims against the bankruptcy estate

which will completely resolve the enforcement action with a global settlement amongst all

Case 14-42187 Doc 265 Filed 10/13/15 Entered 10/13/15 14:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 34


defendants and which is fair and equitable and in the best interests of the Debtor’s bankruptcy

estate. Accordingly, the Trustee seeks the Court’s approval of settlement pursuant to Rule 9019.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and

1334. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Venue is proper pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. Rule 9019 provides the legal predicate for the relief sought.

III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. 1SolTech, Inc. (the “Debtor”) is a company that was founded in Farmers Branch,

Texas in 2008 by Sandra “Sandy” Fardi and Hossein “Zak” Fardi which manufactured and sold

solar panels for residential and commercial use. At all relevant times to the events described

herein, the Debtor’s management consisted solely of Zak Fardi, Sandy Fardi and Ali Enrique

Razavi.

A. State of Texas Initiates a Consumer Protection Enforcement Action Against the Debtor.

3. On September 17, 2013, the State of Texas, acting by and through the Office of

the Texas Attorney General, filed an enforcement action against the Debtor and its owners and

directors—Sandy Fardi, Zak Fardi, and Ali Enrique Razavi1 (collectively, the “Defendants”)—

in State of Texas v. 1SolTech, Inc., et al., Case No. D-1-GV-13-001059, in the 261st District

Court of Travis County, Texas (the “Enforcement Action”), alleging causes of action for

multiple violations of the DTPA based on the Debtor’s sale of solar panels which were falsely

labeled as “Made in the U.S.A.” and falsely labeled as certified to meet safety and performance

standard UL 1703 by the Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory Intertek (the “2nd

Generation Panels”). By the Enforcement Action, the State of Texas seeks restitution for all

1 Ali Enrique Razavi was added as a Defendant on July 14, 2014.



harmed consumers estimated to be over six million dollars, civil penalties for each violation of

the DTPA which allows for a penalty of up to $20,000 per violation with no cap, as well as

attorneys’ fees and costs under the Texas Government Code.

B. The Debtor Initiates a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case.

4. On October 13, 2014, the Debtor initiated the above-styled and numbered case by

filing a petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Case”).

5. Accordingly, the State of Texas filed a proof of claim (Claim #32) in the

Bankruptcy Case in an unliquidated amount for restitution, civil fines and penalties, and

attorneys’ fees (the “Texas Proof of Claim”).

C. A Chapter 11 Trustee is Appointed and the Case is Converted to Chapter 7.

6. On January 21, 2015, the United States Trustee filed a motion to convert the

Bankruptcy Case to one under Chapter 7, or in the alternative to appoint a Chapter 11 Trustee

[Dkt. 87]. On April 14, 2015, the Court entered an Agreed Order granting the United States

Trustee’s motion in-part and ordering that a Chapter 11 Trustee be appointed [Dkt. 155].

Pursuant to the Agreed Order, Mark A. Weisbart (the “Trustee”) was notified and indicated his

acceptance of his selection and appointment as the Chapter 11 Trustee [Dkt. 156].

7. Accordingly, on April 23, 2015, the United States Trustee filed a motion for

approval of the Trustee’s appointment [Dkt. 162]. That same day, the Trustee filed an

application for the estate to engage himself and his law firm to serve as attorneys for the Trustee

[Dkt. 163].

8. Also on April 23, 2015, the Trustee filed a motion to convert the Debtor’s Chapter

11 Bankruptcy Case to a case under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code [Dkt. 164].



9. On April 29, 2015, the Court entered an order granting the Trustee’s application

to engage Mr. Weisbart and his law firm to serve as attorneys for the Trustee [Dkt. 176]. Also

on April 29, 2015, the Court entered an Order granting the United States Trustee’s application to

approve Mr. Weisbart’s appointment as Trustee [Dkt. 177].

10. On April 30, 2015, the Court entered an Order granting the Trustee’s motion to

convert the case to one under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code [Dkt. 179].

D. The Parties Reach a Settlement of the Enforcement Action and Desire Court Approval Pursuant to Rule 9019.

11. Subsequently, representatives for the State of Texas engaged in arms-length

negotiations with the Trustee regarding the Parties’ respective rights, obligations and liability,

and as a result, the Parties desire to enter into a settlement consisting of an Agreed Final

Judgment and Permanent Injunction (the “Settlement Agreement”) to be entered in the

Enforcement Action which will completely resolve all liability by and between the Debtor’s

bankruptcy estate and the State of Texas as part of a global settlement that includes all

Defendants.

12. Specifically, the Settlement Agreement provides for the following relief against

the bankruptcy estate: (a) injunctive relief precluding the Debtor from future violations of the

DTPA; (b) notice to be provided by the bankruptcy estate to purchasers of the Debtor’s 2nd

Generation Panels of the bankruptcy case and certain information pertaining to the uncertified

panels; (c) restitution for harmed consumers in the amount of $2,754,322.98 allocated amongst

designated purchasers of the uncertified 2nd Generation Panels (the “Restitution Amount”); (d)

civil penalties in the amount of $5,000,000.00 (the “Civil Penalties Amount”); and (e)

attorneys’ fees incurred in obtaining the award of civil penalties in the amount of $150,000.00

(the “Civil Penalties Attorneys’ Fees”) (collectively, the Restitution Amount, Civil Penalties



Amount and the Civil Penalties Attorneys’ Fees are referred to herein as the “Settlement

Amount”). A true and correct copy of the Agreed Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction for

which approval is sought is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference as

though fully set forth herein.

13. The State of Texas shall have an allowed unsecured claim in the Settlement

Amount in the Bankruptcy Case and that such allowed claim will supersede the Texas Proof of

Claim previously filed. The Parties further agree that the Civil Penalties Amount and the Civil

Penalties Attorneys’ Fees allocated thereto constitute a fine or penalty pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §

726(a)(4). Additionally, the Parties agree that the Restitution Amount shall constitute an allowed

unsecured claim but that, to the extent any distribution is made to unsecured creditors in the

Bankruptcy Case, the Trustee expressly reserves the right to challenge the treatment of the

Restitution Amount pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 726 in the Bankruptcy Case.

14. Trial in the Enforcement Action was set for October 5, 2015; however, in light of

the proposed compromise, the parties to the Enforcement Action passed the October 5, 2015

setting by agreement in order to obtain the Court’s approval of the Settlement Agreement.

Accordingly, the Trustee respectfully submits that the settlement represents a fair and equitable

resolution of the Enforcement Action and should be approved as submitted to the Court.

IV. RELIEF REQUESTED

15. Settlements and compromises are “a normal part of the process of

reorganization.” Protective Comm. of Stockholder of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson (In re

TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc.), 390 U.S. 414, 424 (1968), on remand, TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v.

Kirkland, 471 F.2d 10 (5th Cir. 1972). The Court has the discretionary authority to approve a

settlement under Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a). See TMT Trailer, 390 U.S. at 424; Continental



Airlines, Inc. v. Airline Pilots’ Ass’n Int’l. (In re Continental Airlines, Inc.), 907 F.2d 1500, 1508

(5th Cir. 1990). After notice and hearing, a trustee or debtor may compromise or settle claims in

the administration of the estate with the approval of the Court. See FED. R. BANKR. P. 9019(a).

Whether to approve a compromise is a matter within the sound discretion of the Court. See In re

Aweco, Inc., 725 F.2d 293, 297–98 (5th Cir. 1984). The Court should approve a settlement

agreement if the settlement is “fair and equitable and in the best interest of the estate.” Rivercity

v. Herpel (In re Jackson Brewing Co.), 624 F.2d 599, 602 (5th Cir. 1980).

16. The terms “fair and equitable” mean that: (i) senior interests are entitled to full

priority over junior interests; and (ii) the compromise is reasonable in relation to the likely

rewards of litigation. In re Cajun Electric Power Coop., 119 F.3d 349, 355 (5th Cir. 1997); In

re Jackson Brewing Co., 624 F.2d at 602. In determining whether a proposed compromise is fair

and equitable, a Court should consider the following factors:

a. the probabilities of ultimate success should the claim be litigated; b. the complexity, expense, and likely duration of litigating the claim; c. the difficulties of collecting a judgment rendered from such litigation; and d. all other factors relevant to a full and fair assessment of the wisdom of the

compromise.

TMT Trailer, 390 U.S. at 424.

Analysis of Proposed Settlement

17. In the instant case, the Trustee believes that the proposed compromise satisfies the

requirements established by the Supreme Court in TMT Trailer, and as further elaborated by the

Fifth Circuit. See 471 F.2d at 10. The Trustee believes that a prompt resolution of the

Enforcement Action is in the best interests of not only the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate, but also

the creditors in this case because it will result in a decrease of the Debtor’s financial obligations.



The reduced costs and certainty associated with the proposed Settlement Agreement provide

benefits to the estate, including all unsecured creditors.

18. Moreover, the Parties agree that the Civil Penalties Amount and the Civil

Penalties Attorneys’ Fees allocated thereto shall be treated in the Bankruptcy Case pursuant to 11

U.S.C. § 726(a)(4), thereby ensuring that those respective amounts under the Texas Proof Claim

will not impact distribution to any secured, priority or unsecured creditor in this case.

Additionally, the Restitution Amount under the Settlement Agreement represents a significant

decrease of the estate’s potential liability for sales of the 2nd Generation Panels. Furthermore,

the Settlement Agreement provides for affirmative notice to be provided to all purchasers of the

2nd Generation Panels. As a result, the Settlement Agreement has a public health and safety

component due to the risk of fire associated with the continued use of the uncertified 2nd

Generation Panels.

19. Probabilities of Ultimate Success. Given that the Restitution Amount in the

Settlement Agreement is approximately $3,245,677.02 less than the amount initially sought and

the uncertainties attendant to litigating the matter, including risks of delay and exposure to

additional attorneys’ fees, the Settlement Agreement represents an acceptable and preferred

compromise for the Debtor. In the event the Enforcement Action was litigated, the Parties

anticipate that the Debtor’s liability could far exceed amounts under the Settlement Agreement.

20. Complexity, Expense, and Likely Duration. Without the Settlement Agreement,

the Parties could potentially spend a considerable amount of time litigating their respective

claims and defenses arising from the Enforcement Action in connection with the Debtor’s

liability. The Trustee believes that the costs of such litigation weigh strongly in favor of

settlement.



21. Difficulty in Collecting Judgment. The Trustee believes this factor is inapplicable

and, as a result, it has not been considered by this analysis.

22. Other Factors. The Trustee believes that the proposed compromise is equitable

and in the best interests of the estate because it will not impact any distribution to secured or

priority creditors in this case. Further, the Restitution Amount under the proposed settlement

reduces a sizeable claim which could impact any distribution to unsecured creditors. Moreover,

the civil penalties and attorneys’ fees will not impact any distribution to any secured, priority or

unsecured creditor in this case. Additionally, the proposed compromise allows for liquidation of

the State of Texas’ Proof of Claim with certainty, and will further the prompt administration of

the estate by providing notice of the bankruptcy case to purchasers of the uncertified 2nd

Generation Panels. Accordingly, the proposed compromise achieves a result consistent with the

dictates of the Bankruptcy Code and is in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate.

23. The Trustee submits that this proposed settlement is the product of an arms-length

bargain.

24. Pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 9019, the Trustee’s affidavit in support of the

settlement is attached to this Motion to Approve Settlement as Exhibit B.

V. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the Mark A. Weisbart, Trustee, respectfully requests that the Court: (i)

grant the Motion to Approve Settlement; (ii) approve the settlement and authorize him to take

such actions deemed necessary and appropriate to enter and consummate the settlement; (iii)

enter an order granting the relief requested by this Motion to Approve Settlement substantially in

the form of the proposed order attached to this Motion as Exhibit C; and (iv) for such other

relief as the Court deems just and proper.



Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mark A. Weisbart Mark A. Weisbart Texas Bar No. 21102650 THE LAW OFFICE OF MARK A. WEISBART 12770 Coit Road, Suite 541 Dallas, Texas 75251 (972) 628-4903 Phone (972) 628-4905 Fax [email protected] COUNSEL FOR CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing instrument was served on the attached mailing matrix either through the Court's electronic notification system as permitted by Appendix 5005 III. E. to the Local Rules of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Texas, or by first class United States Mail, postage prepaid on this the 13th day of October, 2015. /s/ Mark A. Weisbart Mark A. Weisbart


mailto:[email protected]

NO. D-1-GV-13-001059

STATE OF TEXAS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, §

§ v. § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS § 1 SOLTECH INC.; SANDRA “SANDY” § FARDI; HOSSEIN “ZAK” FARDI; and § ALI ENRIQUE RAZAVI, §

Defendants. § 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

AGREED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

On this date, came for hearing in the above-entitled and numbered cause in which the

STATE OF TEXAS (“Plaintiff” or “State”), acting by and through Attorney General of Texas,

KEN PAXTON, on behalf of his Consumer Protection Division, is Plaintiff, and 1 SOLTECH

INC.; SANDRA “SANDY” FARDI; HOSSEIN “ZAK” FARDI; and ALI ENRIQUE RAZAVI,

(collectively, the “Defendants”), are Defendants. Through their respective attorneys of record,

the parties wish to make the following stipulations and agree to entry of this AGREED FINAL

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (hereafter “AFJPI” or “Judgment”).

I. STIPULATIONS

The parties agree to entry of this Judgment, and at their request, the Court finds that:

A. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action.

B. The Court has jurisdiction over the Defendants in this matter.

C. Venue is proper in Travis County, Texas.

D. The activities of Defendants constitute trade and/or commerce.

E. Entry of this Judgment is in the public interest.

Exhibit "A"

Case 14-42187 Doc 265 Filed 10/13/15 Entered 10/13/15 14:54:35 Desc Main Document of 34

State of Texas v. 1 SolTech Inc., et al. Page 2 of 13 Agreed Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction

F. This Judgment is non-appealable.

G. Nothing in this Judgment in any way affects any individual’s right to bring a cause

of action under the DTPA, or any other law or regulation of this State.

H. The Court shall have continuing jurisdiction to enforce this Judgment, save and

except as preempted by the provisions of title 11 of the United States Code as to

Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC.

I. Defendants acknowledge notice of this permanent injunction and acceptance of

same; therefore no writ need be issued.

J. Defendant 1SOLTECH INC. acknowledges that it bought solar panels that were

manufactured in China, and advertised and resold the Chinese panels as being

“Made in the USA by 1 SolTech, Inc.”

K. Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. acknowledges that it advertised and sold solar panels

as having met certification and testing standards, when the panels had not been

certified.

II. DEFINITIONS

For purposes of this Agreed Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction, the following

definitions shall apply:

A. “Consumer” means an individual, partnership, corporation, or entity of any kind,

including this state or a subdivision or agency of this state, which seeks or acquires by purchase or

lease, any goods or services.

B. “DTPA” means the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices - Consumer Protection Act,

TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.41 et seq. (West, Westlaw through 2013, Third Called Session).

Exhibit "A"



C. “Defendants” shall mean 1 SOLTECH INC.; Sandra “Sandy” Fardi; Hossein

“Zak” Fardi; Ali Enrique Razavi; their officers; agents; servants; employees; all other persons in

active concert or participation with them, whether acting directly or through any person, business

entity, limited liability company, trust, corporation, partnership, subsidiary, division, assumed or

fictitious business name, or device; and all entities in which they have an ownership interest, serve

as officers or directors, have formed, created, are affiliated with, or control, and where such entity

is engaged in or assists others engaged in the advertising, promotion, offering for sale, sale or

distribution or provision of solar panel-type goods and/or services. For purposes of this Final

Judgment, an entity shall be considered to be formed, created, affiliated with, or controlled by

Defendants if Defendants have a more than 10% ownership of, serve as officers, directors or

members of, or share management, ownership, use of facilities, equipment or employees with, an

entity. However, Defendants shall not include the Trustee or any of his agents, employees and

attorneys.

D. “Represent” means to make an affirmative declaration of the representation orally,

in writing, or through other communication.

E. “Clear and conspicuous” and “Clearly and conspicuously” mean:

(1) For print communications, the message shall be in a type size and location

sufficiently noticeable for an ordinary consumer to read and comprehend it,

in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.

(2) In communications disseminated orally, the message shall be delivered in a

volume and cadence sufficient for an ordinary consumer to comprehend it.

Exhibit "A"



(3) In communications made through an electronic medium (such as television,

video, radio, and interactive media such as the Internet, online services, and

software), the message shall be presented simultaneously in both the audio

and visual portions of the communication. In any communication

presented solely through visual or audio means, the message may be made

through the same means by which the communication is presented. Any

audio message shall be delivered in a volume and cadence sufficient for an

ordinary consumer to hear and comprehend it. Any visual message shall

be of a size and shade, with a degree of contrast to the background against

which it appears, and shall appear on the screen for a duration and in a

location sufficiently noticeable for an ordinary consumer to read and

comprehend it. The message shall be in understandable language and

syntax. Nothing contrary to, inconsistent with, or in mitigation of the

message shall be used in any communication.

F. “Solar Product(s)” means solar panels and/or modules; components thereof; and

any product, equipment or services sold by Defendants to be used in the installation, power

generation, or maintenance of the solar panels and/or modules.

G. “Bankruptcy Case” means that certain bankruptcy case styled In re 1SolTech,

Inc., Case No. 14-42187 pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of

Texas, Sherman Division.

Exhibit "A"



H. “Trustee” means Mark A. Weisbart, in his capacity as the duly appointed and

acting chapter 7 trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Defendant 1 SOLTECH, INC. in the

Bankruptcy Case.

III. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendants, their officers,

agents, employees, and attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, are

hereby permanently ENJOINED from:

A. Failing to Clearly and Conspicuously disclose on all marketing, advertising,

solicitations, or other representations of any kind of Solar Products the national origin of the Solar

Products;

B. Making representations of any kind, including but not limited to verbal or written

representations, that the Solar Products are “Made in USA,” manufactured in the United States of

America, or are assembled solely or largely from components made or manufactured in the United

States of America; or making other representations of this kind regarding Defendants’ Solar

Products, unless those representations are factual;

C. Representing that the Solar Products offered for sale or sold by Defendants have

met certification or testing requirements of any regulatory authority or body, or any testing

authority or body, unless those representations are factual;

D. Furnishing Solar Products which are not manufactured in the United States of

America to a consumer if Defendants represent to said consumer that it would be furnished Solar

Products that were manufactured in the United States of America;

Exhibit "A"



E. Furnishing Solar Products which are not certified to meet the UL 1703 standard by

an authorized testing facility to a consumer if Defendants represent in any way, including through

statements on Defendants’ website, data sheets, labeling, verbal representations, utilization of

certification marks, or any other representations of any kind, that Defendants’ Solar Products are

certified to meet the UL 1703 standard;

F. Representing that the Solar Products meet or exceed the requirements of any state

or federal law, regulation, or rule requiring that products be made in the United States of America

or the State of Texas, unless those representations are factual;

G. Representing that warranties covering the Solar Products include rights, remedies,

and terms of length or scope of coverage which they do not; and

H. Utilizing order acknowledgment forms, invoices, pro forma invoices, shipping

confirmation, bills of lading, or any other correspondence or documentation templates that include

or make reference to made in the USA, made in America, or any other similar statement of national

origin, when selling, offering to sell, or otherwise corresponding regarding the sale or availability

for sale, of Solar Products, unless the Solar Products subject of the documentation are or were

manufactured in the United States by Defendants.

IV. NOTICE TO HARMED CONSUMERS

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that within 120 days of

the entry of this Judgment, Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. shall provide notice to the 42 consumers

which are set forth in “Exhibit C” to the State of Texas’s Motion for Discovery Sanctions, filed on

July 15, 2015 in the above-styled and numbered Case No. D-1-GV-13-001059, which, for ease of

Exhibit "A"



reference and avoidance of doubt, reflects consumers who paid for a 1 SOLTECH INC. Solar

Product that was manufactured after February 14, 2013 as set forth on “Exhibit 1” attached hereto.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that within 120 days of

the entry of this Judgment, Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. shall, in addition to those consumers

identified in Exhibit 1, provide notice to all purchasers of a 1 SOLTECH INC. Solar Product

directly from 1 SOLTECH INC that was manufactured after February 14, 2013.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the notice described

Section IV of this Judgment shall include the following information:

A. Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. did not have UL 1703 certifications from Intertek after February 14, 2013;

B. Any 1 SOLTECH INC. label that includes the Intertek UL 1703 mark after

that date is incorrect; and C. Contact information for Intertek, including the telephone number, email

address and website for the Intertek Inspector Information Center, www.intertek.com/inspector-center/.

V. RESTITUTION TO HARMED CONSUMERS

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff shall have

and recover Judgment against Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. as restitution pursuant to Texas

Business and Commerce Code section 17.47(d), to consumers who paid for a 1 SOLTECH INC.

Solar Product that was manufactured after February 14, 2013, the amount of TWO MILLION

SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED TWENTY TWO

DOLLARS AND 98 CENTS ($2,754,322.98) with such amount allocated as set forth in “Exhibit

C” to the State of Texas’s Motion for Discovery Sanctions, filed on July 15, 2015 in the

above-styled and numbered Case No. D-1-GV-13-001059, which, for ease of reference and

Exhibit "A"


http://www.intertek.com/inspector-center/


avoidance of doubt, reflects consumers who paid for a Solar Product that was manufactured after

February 14, 2013 as set forth on “Exhibit 1” attached hereto. However, in the event any

consumers identified on “Exhibit 1” file a proof of claim in the Bankruptcy Case that is lower than

the amounts so allocated, the amount contained in the proof of claim shall represent the amount of

restitution due such consumer.

VI. CIVIL PENALTIES

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

A. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant 1 SOLTECH

INC. the sum of FIVE MILLION DOLLAR AND NO CENTS ($5,000,000.00) as a civil penalty

and not as compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

B. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant SANDRA

“SANDY” FARDI the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS

($100,000.00) as a civil penalty and not as compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

C. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant HOSSEIN

“ZAK” FARDI the sum of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS


D. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant ALI

ENRIQUE RAZAVI the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS


Exhibit "A"



VII. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

A. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant 1 SOLTECH

INC. the sum of ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS

($150,000.00) for the reimbursement of attorneys’ fees, investigative costs, and Court costs to the

Texas Attorney General, which fees were incurred on behalf of Plaintiff in obtaining the award of

civil fines and penalties against Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC. and do not constitute an antecedent

debt with respect to this litigation.

B. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant SANDRA

“SANDY” FARDI the sum of TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS



civil fines and penalties against Defendant SANDRA “SANDY” FARDI and do not constitute an

antecedent debt with respect to this litigation.

C. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant HOSSEIN

“ZAK” FARDI the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS



civil fines and penalties against Defendant HOSSEIN “ZAK” FARDI and do not constitute an


D. The State of Texas shall have Judgment and recover from Defendant ALI

ENRIQUE RAZAVI the sum of TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS

Exhibit "A"





civil fines and penalties against Defendant ALI ENRIQUE RAZAVI and do not constitute an


VIII. MISCELLANEOUS

IT IS ORDERED that the State is authorized to monitor compliance with this Agreed

Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction by any lawful method.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the State shall have

all writs of execution and other processes necessary to enforce this Agreed Final Judgment and

Permanent Injunction, except as to any amounts awarded against Defendant 1 SOLTECH INC.

which amounts may only be recovered in the Bankruptcy Case as provided under title 11 of the

United States Code.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that all costs of Court

incurred in this case are taxed against the parties incurring same.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendants shall

not represent to the public that this Judgment constitutes approval by Plaintiff or this Court of

any of Defendants’ actions or business activities.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that if in the future any

definition or provision in this Judgment is inconsistent with the laws of the State of Texas or any

rules or regulations promulgated thereunder, then such laws and/or rules and regulations will

prevail over the terms of this Judgment, provided that the remaining terms of the Judgment not

affected by such laws, rules, or regulations will remain in full force and effect.

Exhibit "A"



IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that nothing contained

herein shall preclude or waive any party’s rights in the Bankruptcy Case in any respect, including,

without limitation, the application of 11 U.S.C. § 726 with regard to the characterization in the

Bankruptcy Case of any amounts awarded in this Judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that all relief not

expressly granted herein is denied.

SIGNED AND ENTERED this ________ day ________________, 2015.

JUDGE PRESIDING

Exhibit "A"



APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND ENTRY REQUESTED:

KEN PAXTON Attorney General of Texas CHARLES E. ROY First Assistant Attorney General JAMES E. DAVIS Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation TOMMY PRUD’HOMME Consumer Protection Division ________________________________ NANETTE DINUNZIO Texas Bar No. 24036484 JACOB A. PETRY Texas Bar No. 24088219 Office of the Attorney General Consumer Protection Division P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711 Telephone: (512) 475-4654 Facsimile: (512) 463-1267 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS

Exhibit "A"




APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND ENTRY REQUESTED: ________________________________ MARK A. WEISBART Texas Bar No. 21102650 The Law Office of Mark A. Weisbart 12770 Coit Road, Suite 541 Dallas, Texas 75251 Telephone: (972) 628-4903 Facsimile: (972) 628-4905 [email protected] CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE FOR THE DEFENDANT 1 SOLTECH INC.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND ENTRY REQUESTED: ________________________________ MARK H. HOW Texas Bar No. 10059900 BUDDY APPLE Texas Bar No. 24059387 How Frels Rohde Woods & Duke, P.C. 2027 Young Street Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214) 720-2220 Facsimile: (214) 720-2240 [email protected] [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR THE DEFENDANTS SANDRA “SANDY” FARDI; HOSSEIN “ZAK” FARDI; and ALI ENRIQUE RAZAVI

Exhibit "A"




IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

In re: §

§1 SOLTECH, INC., § Case No. 14-42187-btr

§Debtor. § Chapter 7

AFFIDAVIT OF CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO APPROVE

SETTLEMENT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY

PROCEDURE 9019

STATE OF TEXAS §

§COUNTY OF DALLAS §

Mark A. Weisbart, Chapter 7 Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of 1 SoITech, Inc., being

duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

1. "My name is Mark A. Weisbart. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated

herein and they are true and correct. 1 am over the age of twenty-one (21) years, and 1 have

never been charged with or convicted of a felony or crime of moral turpitude, and 1 am in all

respects competent to make this Affidavit.

2. On April 29, 2015,1 was appointed Chapter 7 Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of

1 SoITech, Inc. 1submit this affidavit pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 9019 in support of the

Motion to Approve Settlement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 (the

"Motion toApprove Settlement").'

3. 1 recommend the Court's approval of the Motion to Approve Settlement, and

believe the terms described in the Motion satisfy the requirements for approval of compromises

of controversies under Federal Bankruptcy Rule 9019, as enunciated in Protective Comm. of

' Capitalized terms not defmed in this affidavit shall have the meanings stated in the Motion toApprove Settlement.

Exhibit "B"


Stockholder of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson (In re TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc.), 390 U.S.

414, 424 (1968), on remand, TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Kirkland, 471 F.2d 10 (5th Cir. 1972)

and Continental Airlines, Inc. v. Airline Pilots' Ass'n Int'l. (In re Continental Airlines, Inc.), 907

F.2d 1500, 1508 (5th Cir. 1990).

4. More specifically, I believe the proposed settlement satisfies the foregoing

standard for approval of a settlement as follows:

5. Probability of Ultimate Success. Given that the Restitution Amount in the

Settlement Agreement is approximately $3,245,677.02 less than the amount initially sought and

the uncertainties attendant to litigating the matter, including risks of delay and exposure to

additional attorneys' fees, the Settlement Agreement represents an acceptable and preferred

compromise for the bankruptcy estate. In the event the Enforcement Action was litigated, I

anticipate that the bankruptcy estates' liability could far exceed amounts under the Settlement

Agreement.

6. Complexity. Expense, and Likely Duration. The Enforcement Action involves

complex claims under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Without the Settlement

Agreement, I believe the Parties could potentially spend a considerable amount of time litigating

their respective claims and defenses arising from the Enforcement Action in connection with the

Debtor's liability. I believe that the costs of such litigation weigh strongly in favor of settlement.

7. Difficulty in Collectins Judement. I believe this factor is inapplicable and, as a

result, it has not been considered by this analysis.

8. Other Factors. I believe that the proposed compromise is equitable and in the

best interests of the bankruptcy estate because it will not impact any distribution to secured or

priority creditors in this case. Further, the Restitution Amount under the proposed settlement

Exhibit "B"


reduces a sizeable claim which could impact any distribution to unsecured creditors. Moreover,

the civil penalties and attorneys' fees will not impact any distribution to any secured, priority or

unsecured creditor in this case. Additionally, I believe the proposed compromise allows for

liquidation of the State of Texas' Proof of Claim with certainty, and will further the prompt

administration of the estate by providing notice of the bankruptcy case to purchasers of the

uncertified 2nd Generation Panels.

9. In light of the foregoing, I believe that the proposed compromise achieves a result

consistent with the dictates of the Bankruptcy Code and is in the best interests of the bankruptcy

estate.

10. The foregoing constitutes my statement pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 9019.

Mark A. Weisbart

Chapter 7 Trustee of 1 SolTech, Inc.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this

day of October 2015.

Notary Public, State of Texas

TARAH M. SIMMONSI NotaryPublic, State of Texas

My Commission ExpiresNovember 21, 2016

Exhibit "B"


IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

IN RE: 1SOLTECH, INC. Debtor

Case No. 14-42187 Chapter 7

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT

PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 9019

On this date, came on to be considered the Chapter 7 Trustee’s Motion to Approve

Settlement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 (the “Motion to Approve

Settlement”).1 The Court, have considered the merits thereof, finds as follows:

This Court has jurisdiction over the Motion to Approve Settlement pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1334. The matter is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). The Court has the

authority to grant the requested relief pursuant to Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019. The

Court finds that notice of the Motion to Approve Settlement as reflected in its certificate of

service was appropriate, proper and sufficient.

There was no objection to the Motion to Approve Settlement. The Court further finds

that considering (a) the probability of ultimate success in any litigation with due consideration

for uncertainty of fact and law; (b) the complexity and likely duration of any litigation and any

attendant expenses, inconvenience and delay; and (c) the interests of creditors of the estate, that

the compromise between the bankruptcy estate and the State of Texas as proposed is fair and

reasonable and is in the best interest of the bankruptcy estate and its creditors, and should be

approved by the Court. Accordingly, it is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED

that:

1. The Motion to Approve Settlement is GRANTED;

1 Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings stated in the Motion to Approve Settlement.

Exhibit "C"


2. Mark A. Weisbart, in his official capacity as the Chapter 7 Trustee for the

Debtor’s bankruptcy estate, is authorized to enter into the Settlement Agreement as described in

the Motion to Approve Compromise, a copy of which is attached to the Motion as Exhibit A,

which is hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein and approved in all

respects;

3. The State of Texas will have an allowed unsecured claim in the Settlement

Amount of $7,904,322.98 (the “Allowed Claim”) and such Allowed Claim will supercede the

Texas Proof of Claim previously filed;

4. The Chapter 7 Trustee shall have the right to challenge the treatment of the

$2,754,322.98 Restitution Amount portion of the Settlement Amount in the Bankruptcy Case

pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 726;

5. The Chapter 7 Trustee is hereby authorized to take any and all actions necessary

to implement the terms of the Settlement Agreement without further order of the Court,

including, among other things, (a) carrying out the terms of the Settlement Agreement, (b)

allowing the Enforcement Action to proceed in order to establish the Allowed Claim, and (c)

amending the claim of the State of Texas in the above-styled and numbered case and deeming

the claim as allowed without any further action;

6. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising from

or related to the interpretation, implementation, or enforcement of this Order; and

7. Notwithstanding any Bankruptcy Rule to the contrary, this Order shall take effect

immediately upon entry.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Exhibit "C"


Label Matrix for local noticing 1SolTech, Inc. 1st Choice Packaging LLC 0540-4 1920 Diplomat Dr. 1212 Tappan Circle Case 14-42187 Farmers Branch, TX 75234-8913 Carrollton, TX 75006-6911 Eastern District of Texas Sherman Tue Oct 13 12:16:36 CDT 2015

AT & T Andrew Afifian Houshang Afifian P.O. Box 5001 2503 Colby Street #437 Andrew Afifian Carol Stream, IL 60197-5001 Dallas, TX 75201-2057 2503 Colby Street #437 Dallas, TX 75201-2057

Christopher M. Albert Aldinet Green S.L. Aldinet Green S.L. Busch Ruotolo & Simpson, LLP % Alfonso Soto c/o Alfonso Soto 100 Crescent Court 11395 James Watt Drive The Soto Law Firm Suite 250 Suite A-9 11395 James Watt Dr., Suite A-9 Dallas, TX 75201-1823 El Paso, TX 79936-5941 El Paso, TX 79936-5941

Ali E. Razavi Ali E. Razavi Altech Building Systems Corporation 803 Fair Lawn Street 1235 Delmont Drive 904 Atlantic Avenue Allen, TX 75002-5008 Richardson, TX 75080-5813 Point Pleasant, NJ 08742-2917

Mahmoud Aminian Andy Totti Jarold "Buddy" Apple 5209 Morris Drive 1942 Caddo Street How Frels Rohde Duke & Smith, P.C. Plano, TX 75093 Little Elm, TX 75068-6308 2027 Young St. Dallas, TX 75201-5711

Attorney General of Texas Axium Solar Axium Solar Bankruptcy Division 1005 Pacid Avenue 1005 Placid Avenue PO Box 12548 Suite 100 Suite 100 Austin, TX 78711-2548 Plano, TX 75074-8655 Plano, TX 75074-8655

BRE/DP TX LLC BRE/DP TX LLC Bama Freight Jennifer Gehrt c/o Jennifer A. Gehrt 404 W 4th St PO Box 224409 Barbee & Gehrt, L.L.P. Prattville, AL 36067-2803 Dallas, TX 75222-4409 P.O. Box 224409 Dallas, TX 75222-4409

Elizabeth Banda Calvo Daniel K. Bearden Jr. C B Richard Ellis Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott Law Offices of Robert E. Luna, P.C. Attn: Amanda Baker 500 E. Border Street 4411 N. Central Expressway 2100 McKinney Avenue, Suite 700 Suite 640 Dallas, TX 75205-4210 Dallas, TX 75201-6909 Arlington, TX 76010-7457

CBeyond CCC of New York Carrollton-Farmers Branch 4835 LBJ Freeway, Suite 900 P.O. Box 288 Independent School District Dallas, TX 75244-6001 Tonawanda, NY 14151-0288 1445 N. Perry Road Carrollton, TX 75006-6134

Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School 1445 N. Perry Road c/o Daniel K. Bearden Carrollton-Farmers Branch School Distric Carrollton, TX 75006-6134 Law Offices of Robert E Luna, P.C. c/o Daniel K. Bearnden, Esq. 4411 N Central Expressway Law Offices Of Robert E. Luna, P.C. Dallas, Texas 75205-4210 4411 North Central Expressway Dallas, TX 75205-4210


Charles A. Gruen City of Farmers Branch Coastal Plains Power and Battery, LLC 381 Broadway, Suite 300 Alarm Registrations/False Alarm Billing Jason R. Kennedy Westwood, NJ 07675-2239 13000 William Dodson Parkway Thomas, Feldman & Wilshusen, L.L.P. Farmers Branch, TX 75234-6253 9400 N. Central Expressway, Suite 900 Dallas, TX 75231-5051

Community Waste Disposal (p)TEXAS COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS DLS Worldwide 2010 California Crossing REVENUE ACCOUNTING DIV - BANKRUPTCY SECTION 1000 Windham Parkway Dallas, TX 75220-2310 PO BOX 13528 Bolingbrook, IL 60490-3507 AUSTIN TX 78711-3528

Dallas County Dallas County Dallas County Tax Assessor Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP John R. Ames, CTA c/o Laurie Spindler Huffman c/o Laurie Spindler Huffman 500 Elm Street 2777 N. Stemmons Frwy 2777 N. Stemmons Frwy Ste 1000 Dallas, TX 75202-3304 Ste 1000 Dallas, Texas 75207-2328 Dallas, TX 75207-2328

Daniel K. Bearden, Jr. Direct Energy Business Direct Energy Business - Dallas Law Office of Robert E. Luna, P.C. 1001 Liberty Ave Fl 13 P.O. Box 67863 4411 N. Central Expressway c/o Jonathan Love Dallas, TX 75267-6863 Dallas, TX 75205-4210 Pittsburg, PA 15222-3728

Donald M. Barnett Electro-Wise Dallas, Inc. Elizabeth Banda Calvo Barnett & Garcia 2434 McIver Lane Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott 3821 Juniper Trace, Suite 108 Carrollton, TX 75006-6511 P.O. Box 13430 Austin, TX 78738-5514 Arlington, Texas 76094-0430

FLEXCON COMPANY, INC. Fabrico Atlanta Hossein Fardi 5000 WEST ESPLANADE AVENUE, SUITE 436 Attn: Melanie Neely c/o Mark H. How METAIRIE, LA 70006-2570 4175 Royal Drive, Suite 800 2027 Young St. Kennesaw, GA 30144-6429 Dallas, TX 75201-5711

Sandy Fardi FedEx Freight FedEx Tech Connect Inc as Assignee c/o Mark H. How 2200 Forward Drive of FedEx Express/Ground/Freight/Office 2027 Young St. Harrison, AR 72601-2234 3965 Airways Blvd, Module G, 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75201-5711 Memphis, Tennessee 38116-5017

Flexcon Freeman Freeman Expositions, Inc. P.O. Box 904 Attn: Daphene Mayfield Attn: Mary Winter Spencer, MA 01562-0904 P.O. Box 660613 1600 Viceroy, Suite 100 Dallas, TX 75266-0613 Dallas, Texas 75235-2312

Mark Frels Jennifer Gehrt Green Mountain Energy How Frels Berman Rohde Woods & Duke PO Box 224409 P.O. Box 328 2027 Young St Dallas, TX 75222-4409 Houston, TX 77001-0328 Dallas, TX 75201-5711

Green Mountain Energy Company Heritage Glass, LLC Hossein Fardi P.O. Box 1046 1450 Lincoln Street 4724 Towne Square Houston, TX 77251-1046 Kingsport, TN 37660-5194 #1610 Plano, TX 75024-2227


Hossein Fardi Houshang Afifian Houshang Afifian 4724 Towne Square Drive 5806 Glenn Heather Dr. c/o Andrew Bergman #1610 Dallas, TX 75252-4911 4514 Travis St., Suite 300 Plano, TX 75024-2227 Dallas, TX 75205-4186

Mark How How Frels Rohde Duke & Smith, P.C. How Frels Rohde Woods & Duke, P.C. How Frels Rohde Duke & Smith, P.C. 2027 Young Street 2027 Young St. 2027 Young St. Dallas, TX 75201-5711 Dallas, TX 75201-5711 Dallas, TX 75201-5711

Hudson, Potts & Bernstein, LLP Laurie Spindler Huffman IndCor Properties, Inc. P O Box 3008 Linebarger, Goggan, Blair & Sampson 2 N. Riverside Plaza Monroe, LA 71210-3008 2777 N. Stemmons Frwy Ste 1000 Ste. 2350 Dallas, TX 75207-2328 Chicago, IL 60606-2617

Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service PO Box 7346 Centralized Insolvency Mail Code 5020-DAL Philadelphia, PA 19101-7346 PO Box 7346 1100 Commerce Street Philadelphia, PA 19101-7346 Dallas, TX 75242-1100

Intuit JPM Energy JPM Energy, Inc. 21215 Burbank Blvd., Suite 100 4447 Stoneridge Drive c/o Henry Ku Attorney at Law Woodland Hills, CA 91367-7091 Pleasanton, CA 94588-8414 12674 San Pablo Ave. Richmond, CA 94805

Jan P. Christiansen John B. Hoychick Jason R. Kennedy Hudson Potts & Bernstein Cotton Bolton Hoychick & Doughty Thomas, Feldman & Wilshusen, L.L.P. 1800 Hudson Lane, Suite 300 P.O. Box 857 9400 N. Central Expressway, Suite 900 Monroe, LA 71201-5748 Rayville, LA 71269-0857 Dallas, TX 75231-5051

Milan Kubat Lain, Faulkner & Co., P.C. Landstar Ranqer. Inc. Weltman, Weinberg & Reis Co., LPA 400 N. Saint Paul Dawn Bowers 323 W. Lakeside Avenue Suite 600 13410 Sutton Park Drive South Suite 200 Dallas, TX 75201-6897 Jacksonville, FL 32224-5270 Cleveland, OH 44113-1009

Law Offices of Charles A. Gruen Eric A. Liepins Joyce W. Lindauer 381 Broadway 12770 Coit Road 12720 Hillcrest Road Suite 300 Suite 1100 Suite 625 Westwood, NJ 07675-2239 Dallas, TX 75251-1329 Dallas, TX 75230-2163

Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson MBT Systems Ltd. Madico 2777 N. Stemmons Freeway 309 Route 94 1252 Security Drive Suite 1000 Columbia, NJ 07832-2761 Dallas, TX 75247-6814 Dallas, TX 75207-2328

Margaret (Xuemei) Zhu Mark L. Taylor Michael E. Carnahan 18333 Roehampton Dr. #334 Powers Taylor LLP 2207 Cliffs Edge Drive Dallas, TX 75252-5172 8150 N. Central Expressway Austin, TX 78733-6013 Suite 1575 Dallas, TX 75206-1837


Monitronics Monitronics Morris & Associates Attn: Rob Washington Attn: Rob Washington Attn: Rob Washingto 1848 Norwood Plaza, Suite 101 P.O. Box 814530 P.O. Box 814530 Hurst, TX 76054-3751 Dallas, TX 75381-4530 Dallas, TX 75381-4530

Morris & Hadley Inc Motech Industries, Inc. Science Park Branch Municipal Services Bureau dba Morris & Associates Attn: Legal Dept-Belinda Vong, Peggy Lee Netrma Processing 1848 Norwood Plaza, Suite 212 South Taiwan Science Park 8325 Tuscany Way, Bldg. 4 Hurst, TX 76054-3752 No. 2 Dashun 9th Road, Xinshi District, Austin, TX 78754-4734 Tainan City 74145, Taiwan

Christopher S. Murphy NTTA Chad Aubrey Norcross Office of the Texas Attorney General 5900 W. Plano Parkway Norcross Law 300 West 15th Street Plano, TX 75093-4695 720 Overland Austin, TX 78701-1649 McKinney, TX 75069-0962

Timothy W. O’Neal Rachel Ruth Obaldo PPG Industries Office of the U.S. Trustee Texas Attorney General 1900 N. Josey Lane 110 N. College Ave. Bankruptcy & Collections Division Carrollton, TX 75006-4263 Suite 300 300 W. 15th Street, Mail MC-008 Tyler, TX 75702-7231 Austin, TX 78701-1649

PPG Industries, Inc. Pooya Afifian QSLWM, PC Wagner, Falconer & Judd, Ltd. 5806 Glenn Heather Dr. Kenneth A. Hill c/o Jeffrey Nicolet Dallas, TX 75252-4911 2001 Bryan St., Suite 1800 80 South Eighth Street, Suite 1700 Dallas, Texas 75201-3070 Minneapolis, MN 55402-5357

Regulatory Integrity Division - SAU Renewable Sales, LLC Renewable Sales, LLC Room 556 35 Jeffrey Avenue c/o Robert Ruotolo 101 E. 15th Street Holliston, MA 01746-2027 100 Crescent Court, Suite 250 Austin, TX 78778-0001 Dallas, TX 75201-1823

Renogy Renogy, LLC Robert Ruotolo 14288 Central Avenue 14288 Central Avenue, Suite A Busch Ruotolo & Simpson LLP Chino, CA 91710-5779 Chino, CA 91710-5779 100 Crescent Court, Suite 250 Dallas, TX 75201-1823

Rosen Systems, Inc. SAPA Extrusions SAPA Extrusions North America 2323 Langford St. 9600 Bryn Mawr Avenue c/o Eishel Salas Dallas, TX 75208-2122 Rosemont, IL 60018-5240 400 Rouser Road, Suite 300 Moon Township, PA 15108-2749

SKC, Inc. SSNA, Inc. Sandy Fardi Attn: Paul Kwak 1414 W. North Carrier Parkway 4724 Towne Square 1000 SKC Drive Grand Prairie, TX 75050 #1610 Covington, GA 30014-1599 Plano, TX 75024-2227

Sandy Fardi Schletter Schmalz Inc. 4724 Towne Square Dr. 1001 Commerce Center Drive 5200 Atlantic Avenue #1610 Shelby, NC 28150-7728 Raleigh, NC 27616-1870 Plano, TX 75024-2227


Sigma Supply, Inc. Solar Integrated Systems Solar Integrated Systems c/o Terry P. Diggs c/o Dr. Labib Sultan c/o Matthew B. Henneman 102 Archwood St. 540 Broadway Avenue Watt Beckworth Thompson & Henneman Hot Springs, AR 71901-6044 El Cajon, CA 92021-5423 711 Louisiana St, # 1800, South Tower Houston, TX 77002-2832

Solar Integrated Systems, LLC SolarWorld Americas Inc Solution + System, Inc. 2001 Bryan St., Suite 1800 25300 NW Evergreen Road 411 Hackensack Avenue Dallas, TX 75201-3070 Hillsboro, OR 97124-5768 Hackensack, NJ 07601-6328

Southbound Logistics State Auto Insurance Company State of Texas P.O. Box 198 P.O. Box 182738 c/o Nanette Dinunzio, Asst. Atty General Diana, TX 75640-0198 Columbus, OH 43218-2738 Consumer Protection Division P.O. Box 12548 Austin, TX 78711-2548

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION c/o Weltman, Talesun Solar USA Ltd. Talesun Solar USA Ltd. 323 W. Lakeside Avenue, Ste 200 111 W. St. John P.O. Box 510401 Cleveland, OH 44113-1009 Suite 900 Salt Lake City, UT 84151-0401 San Jose, CA 95113-1122

LynAlise Katherine Tannery Texas Workforce Commission Texas Workforce Commission Buckley Madole. P.C. Rachel R. Obaldo 101 E. 15th Street 14841 Dallas Parkway, Suite 425 c/o Sherri K. Simpson, Paralegal Austin, TX 78778-0001 Dallas, TX 75254-7884 P.O. 12548 Austin, TX 78711-2548

Texas Workforce Commission Texas Workforce Commission Regulatory The State of Texas 101 East 15th Street Integrity Division - SAU Office of the Attorney General of Texas Austin, TX 78778-0001 Collection Division MC 008 P.O. Box 12548 P.O. Box 12548 MC 008 Austin, TX 78711-2548 Austin, TX 78711-2548

(p)TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (TMCC) PO BOX 8026 P.O. Box 3457 PO BOX 8026 CEDAR RAPIDS IA 52408-8026 Torrance, CA 90510-3457 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52408-8026

Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP Troy Bearsden U. S. Attorney Attn: Brian C. Bassett Law Office of Robert E. Luna, P.C. 110 N. College Ave. 303 W. Madison Street 4411 N. Central Expressway Suite 700 Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75205-4210 Tyler, TX 75702-0204 Chicago, IL 60606-3324

U. S. Trustee’s Office U.S. Attorney General UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. 110 N. College Street Department of Justice c/o CST Co. Suite 300 Main Justice Building Attn: Jay Knipe Tyler, TX 75702-7231 10th & Constitution Ave., NW P.O. Box 224768 Washington, DC 20530-0001 Dallas, TX 75222-4768

US Trustee US Trustee Uline Office of the U.S. Trustee 110 North College Ave 2200 S. Lakeside Drive 110 N. College Ave. Room 300 Waukegan, IL 60085-8311 Suite 300 Tyler, TX 75702-7231 Tyler, TX 75702-7231


Uline Shipping Shipping Supplies Utica Deductible Recovery Group Utica National Insurance Group 12575 Uline Drive P.O. Box 962 P.O. Box 962 Pleasant Prairie, WI 53158-3686 Coraopolis, PA 15108-0962 Coraopolis, PA 15108-0962

VALWOOD IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY VSSI, Inc. Valwood Improvement Authority c/o Elizabeth Banda Calvo c/o Jennifer Jones 1740 Briercroft Court Perdue Brandon Fielder et al Hunton & Williams Carrollton, TX 75006-6400 500 E Border St, Suite 640 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 3700 Arlington, TX 76010-7457 Dallas, TX 75202-2755

Valwood Improvement Authority Valwood Improvment Authority Mark A. Weisbart c/o Elizabeth Banda Calvo c/o Elizabeth Banda Calvo The Law Office of Mark A. Weisbart Perdue Brandon Fielder et al Perdue Brandon Fielder et al 12770 Coit Road, Suite 541 PO Box 13430 PO Box 13430 Dallas, TX 75251-1366 Arlington, TX 76094-0430 Arlington, TX 76094-0430

XPO Logistics Ruth Harris Yeager 13777 Ballantyne Corporate Place Office of the U.S. Attorney Charlotte, NC 28277-4411 110 N. College Ave. Suite 700 Tyler, TX 75702-0204

The preferred mailing address (p) above has been substituted for the following entity/entities as so specified by said entity/entities in a Notice of Address filed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 342(f) and Fed.R.Bank.P. 2002 (g)(4).

Comptroller of Public Accts (d)Comptroller of Public Accts Toyota Financial Services Rev Acctg Div/Bankruptcy Dept Rev Acctg Div/Bankruptcy Dept PO Box 5855 PO BOX 13528 PO Box 13528 Carol Stream, IL 60197-5855 Austin, TX 78711 Austin, TX 78711

(d)Toyota Financial Services PO Box 5855 Carol Stream, IL 60197-5855

The following recipients may be/have been bypassed for notice due to an undeliverable (u) or duplicate (d) address.

(d)Altech Building Systems Corporation (d)DLS Worldwide (d)Direct Energy Business -Dallas 904 Atlantic Avenue 1000 Windham Parkway P.O. Box 67863 Point Pleasant, NJ 08742-2917 Bolingbrook, IL 60490-3507 Dallas, TX 75267-6863

(d)Flexcon (d)How Frels Rohde Duke & Smith,P.C. (d)IndCor Properties, Inc. P.O. Box 904 2027 Young Street 2 N. Riverside Plaza, Ste. 2350 Spencer, MA 01562-0904 Dallas, TX 75201-5711 Chicago, IL 60606-2617


(d)Internal Revenue Service (d)JPM Energy (d)MBT Systems Ltd. Mail Code 5020-DAL 4447 Stoneridge Drive 309 Route 94 1100 Commerce Street Pleasanton, CA 94588-8414 Columbia, NJ 07832-2761 Dallas, TX 75242-1100

(d)Madico (d)Mahmoud Aminian (u)Morris & Hadley, Inc. 1252 Security Drive 5209 Morris Drive Dallas, TX 75247-6814 Plano, TX 75093

(d)Timothy W. O’Neal (d)PPG Industries (d)Renewable Sales, LLC Office of the U.S. Trustee 1900 N. Josey Lane 35 Jeffrey Avenue 110 N. College Ave., Ste. 300 Carrollton, TX 75006-4263 Holliston, MA 01746-2027 Tyler, TX 75702-7231

(d)Renogy (u)Rescue My PC (d)SAPA Extrusions 14288 Central Avenue 9600 Bryn Mawr Avenue Chino, CA 91710-5779 Rosemont, IL 60018-5240

(d)SAPA Extrusions, LLC (d)SKC, Inc. (d)Solution + System, Inc. 9600 Bryn Mawr Avenue Attn: Paul Kwak 411 Hackensack Avenue Rosemont, IL 60018-5240 1000 SKC Drive Hackensack, NJ 07601-6328 Covington, GA 30014-1599

(d)Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (d)Mark A. Weisbart End of Label Matrix P.O. Box 3457 The Law Office of Mark A. Weisbart Mailable recipients 160 Torrance, CA 90510-3457 12770 Coit Road, Suite 541 Bypassed recipients 23 Dallas, TX 75251-1366 Total 183


settlement.motion file stamped

Documents

bankruptcy estate pursuant

debtors bankruptcy estate

united states bankruptcy

matter pursuant

global settlement

texas law

travis county district

written objection