Dime Bancorp Inc (fka DIMEQ)

[GO4AWILDRIDE]

wildboar

The check came to my P.O.Box and the check was made out to me.

The one identifier was that the account type (in my case) ROTH IRA was listed so that I could put the money into the account with out having to pay any taxes on it.

I brought the whole letter with the check attached to it to my broker so they knew which account I could deposit it into.


PS: Have you tried to contact the LTI per my earlier posted message on the COOP board? You will need to show them via a PDF file a screen shot of your account showing that the DIMEQ shares were TENDERED in your account. That info shows the LTI that you did indeed sign a release and therefore you would be entitled to your share of the payout as all other holders received. Make sure you send them your CURRENT ADDRESS because if you moved they may have sent your check to an old address as they did for my wife.

PS2: Searching your account you should look around the Feb or March of 2012 to find the TENDER of your shares mine were done on 2/27/2012.

Hope this helps.




GO4AWILDRIDE

[wildboarhog0]

did your check come in your brokers name or from a bank? still havent got my check

[GO4AWILDRIDE]

I received the statement letter on the same day the check arrived.

My wife has not seen her letter or check, I was too busy today to check the P.O.BOX to see if she received her notice and check.

The notice was in a separate envelope from the checks for both of my accounts.

The statement letter not only stated the amount per DIMEQ but also the amount the check would be for.

Hope this helps you.


GO4AWILDRIDE

[GO4AWILDRIDE]

HALF-FULL

I received TWO checks and both were in the amount of $0.1386 per DIMEQ that I held.

Since SCOTTRADE merged with TDAMERICATRADE it is harder to determine the number of shares i bought. After searching thru months of data did I finally see the number of DIMEQ's I bought.

My wife still has not received her check.

My plans are to cash the check for the TAXABLE account and pay the taxes on that, but the ROTH CHECK I will take to the broker to put into the ROTH account so that i don't have to pay any tax when I decide to remove the money.

Hope this helps you.

GO4AWILDRIDE

[collector52]

It all boiled down to Judge Walrath essentially declaring these "warrants" equity rather than a liability. In my mind, that was a misreading of what these instruments were and how the label "warrant" was just a euphemism.

[loginusername]

WhoooHoooo! Just got 2 checks. I had no idea we were getting this. I can barely remember how we were screwed out of the big bucks so I'm pretty happy with this.

[sidedraft]

Check for Class 18[DIME] claim came in mail today, $0.138616/share.

[half-full]

Thanks collector, It was a long weekend waiting for the mail delivery. I did receive my three statement letters and also three separate checks, one for each account I had holdings.

[BBis]

Thanks !

[collector52]

Yes, a statement, letter, notice, advice -- whatever you want to call it, except a check! Seems very odd to me that the court directed the disbursement of the money and the trust says it has it, yet did not just send the money out right away. I could start calling people on Tuesday, but the odds are not high that they will know anything and tell me too.

[BBis]

13.86 ? I'm presently surprised. I haven't received anything yet. So was it just a statement letter ?

[collector52]

I did not receive a check today, but I did receive a notice saying that I would receive at some unspecified time in the future, 13.86 cents per DIMEQ. That is only because I "released" and agreed to a compromise rather than continuing to litigate my claim. Pretty sweet!

[half-full]

So, has anyone seen a check yet? I did get a few shares of COOP this week, but I was a WAMUQ common shareholder also.

[BBis]

I don't believe so. If released and on time, Dimeq got the initial COOP shares and the Class 12 cash or LTI and now the Class 18 claim.

Provide the releases by February 29, 2012 and receive:

Pro Rata share of 8.77% of whatever percentage (if any) that Common Equity Interests get under the Plan. Common Equity Interests are currently slated to share 30% of Newco but this is subject to Court approval;
Pro Rata share of ($9.0 million less approximately $3.2 million) on account of the allowed Class 12 Claim; and
Pro Rata share of a Class 18 Subordinated Claim, up to $10 million, which is currently viewed to be out of the money.

Provide the releases after February 29, 2012 and receive:

None of the Newco Stock going to Common Equity Interest Holders (if any). My understanding is that there either cannot or will not be any Newco Stock escrowed for the Common Equity Interest Holders.
The recovery on account of the Class 12 Claim and Class 18 Claim if you turn in your paperwork within 12 months following the Effective Date.

[$27]

may I trouble you with a question?

I needed to know if DiME shareholders who got 4.5m shares of WMIH commons in 2012 got any more shares related to that original distribution of 4.5m like every former commons shareholder

thanking inadvance

[BBis]

Everyone who signed timely releases should get a check sent out on or after the 10th of January of (approximately/my best guess) .0864289 a share.
---

Ok, so DIMEQ received a pro rata share of 8.77

10,000,000 (DIMEQ class 18) * 82 % (percentage from PR 2020/Jan/1) = 8,200,000

8,200,000 / 94875597 ( Linda’s estimate of released *) = .0864289

* https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121953551

[BBis]

WMI Liquidating Trust to Initiate Final Distribution and Wind-Down of Operations
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1545078/000119312520005481/d866835dex991.htm

[BBis]

There will be time limits to cash the check or to call for a missing check.


----


8. Commencing on the date ninety (90) days following the final distribution to be made pursuant to the Plan, WMILT is directed to (a) post a notice on the WMILT website, www.wmitrust.com, and maintain such notice for thirty (30) days, setting forth the names of parties (i) to whom distributions have been made and such distributions have been returned to WMILT or (ii) to whom distributions have been made and such distributions remain uncashed or not-negotiated and (b) publish a notice, the form of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit “A” once in The Seattle Times notifying all parties that have had their distributions returned to WMILT or which have gone unclaimed and the potential forfeiture of recoveries unless promptly negotiated.

9. In the event that a Creditor fails to respond to the notices and negotiate its distribution within sixty (60) days of the publication referred to in decretal paragraph 8 subsection (b) hereof, such Creditor shall be precluded from receiving any recovery from the Debtors’ estates and the distribution otherwise allocable to such Creditor shall be forfeited and become part of any ultimate donation to a charitable organization by WMILT.

http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229191220000000000001

[BBis]

Everyone who signed releases should get a check sent out on or after the 10th of January of (approximately/my best guess) .0895 a share.
---

Ok, so DIMEQ received a pro rata share of 8.77

10,000,000 (DIMEQ class 18) * 85 % (Rosen’s number from the call ) = 8,500,000

8,000,000 / 94875597 ( Linda’s estimate of released *) = .0895910

* https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121953551

[sidedraft]

Nothing that this vile woman in a black robe has done since 06/10/16 has lessened my contempt for her and the "Delaware Way".

[remmy]

Amen

[linda1]

Judge Walrath should have made it clear to the
LTW Holders in the Order approving the POR that
the Sale to JPM of the Anchor Litigation was Final
and could not be litigated in any other Court.

In fact - she states in the Order approving the POR
that - if possible - the LTW Holders could intervene in
the Anchor Litigation.

Then when JPM runs crying fowl back to Judge Walrath
- when the Ohio Group of LTW Holders file a lawsuit -
she reverses her position. Shameful.

[remmy]

Yes, it's 100% done. And we lost...

I ended up losing a significant amount of money on the LTW's. I reluctantly accepted the .06 settlement. So I personally stood near 0% of getting any type of clawback because I took the settlement. But I figured the chances of undoing a large corp bankruptcy ruling were near zero, even if an error was made with the LTW determination. And I believe an error was made.

But I always kind of hoped the rest of you all saw a payout in the end, even a partial JPM settlement to make you all go away. I mean, they got about $350M in cash they weren't entitled to. And they knew it. They seriously couldn't throw you guys $10M-$15M to make you go away? You would have all been made 100%-500% whole (depending on your average). JPM probably spent $10M in legal fees fighting with you guys all of these years. Selfish pr_cks.

Anyway, that's why I kept checking in about every 6 months for the last 6 years. To see how it went for you all. I'm sorry it didn't end up working out - for any of us really.

I hope the JPM executives and their lawyers working on this bankruptcy enjoyed their 6 and 7 figure bonuses that year. Those yachts and vacation condos in Aspen were paid for with "blood money" from middle class investors and retirees. Hope you JPM guys enjoy the money! Remember, it's your karma.

Anyway, there ends a rather unpleasant 6 yr saga in out lives. GLTA.

Remmy

[Tradeinman]

Looks like JMW ended it.

[Mike D1]

And thats the end?

[linda1]

Since the Ohio Group of LTWs chose not to Appeal
Judge Walrath's Order and withdrew their lawsuit
" with prejudice " - meaning permanently - it is over.

[nodnub]

Is this dead now? Or is there some remaining avenue to pursue?

[Merciernole]

Involved in two potential lawsuits now? BRWC is more important : - )

[linda1]

I agree - I don't understand the " with prejudice "
either.

It's unfortunate we cannot file claims against
JPM in Canada - where JPM doesn't have an
Army of supporting Judges and Law Firms.

[ItsMyOption]

yes, I think there is a lot they could have done. It does not seem to be a good law firm. Why would they signed off with Prejudice? Now from what I believe that restricts all those in that group from filling another claim.

They just where not represented well. Not sure if they can still regroup and get another large holder such as Ben to refile?

[linda1]

I wonder if they could have filed a " Motion "
in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit to request Confirmation of the LTW
Holders' right to file claims against JPM?

And to also bring to the Court's attention that
JPM broke the promises to the Judges?

[goldcanyon341]

The Ohio filing

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
STEPHEN ROSENBAUM,et al.,Plaintiffs,
v.
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,Defendant.



Case No. 2:16-cv-281


Judge: Hon. George C. Smith
Magistrate Judge: Hon. Terence P. Kemp.
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
OF CASE WITH PREJUDICE
All Plaintiffs
-
Stephen Rosenbaum, Frank E. Williams, Jr., Eric Wagoner, David Eidelman, Ian MacKenzie, Carolyn MacKenzie, Marsha Schniedwind, Michael Kovens, Arthur Wasserman, and Adam Shapiro
- provide notice that, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i),
they hereby voluntarily dismiss all of their claims against Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank,N.A., with prejudice
.
Date:
June 16, 2016
MEYER WILSON CO., LPA
__
/s/ Matthew R. Wilson
______________
David P. Meyer (Ohio Bar #0065205)
Matthew R. Wilson (Ohio Bar #0072925)
Michael J. Boyle, Jr. (Ohio Bar #0091162)
1320 Dublin Road, Suite 100
Columbus, OH 43215
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Counsel for Plaintiffs

[ItsMyOption]

Yes, this will add a lot more time. I know the Ohio group counsel was working many on consignment, and they probably felt they where out gunned by the army of JPM attorney's.

I feel that all LTW holders that did not opt-in have no agreement with the Delaware court and we can file our claim in any state. We just need better attorneys that know how to fight.

[linda1]

I guess they determined that the Ohio Judge
would not proceed with the Lawsuit while
a Contempt of Court Order was active.


The only other recourse I know of is an
Appeal of Judge Walrath's Order - but then
why not request a stay of proceedings in the
Ohio Court in conjunction with an appeal of
Judge Walrath's Order rather than withdraw
the Lawsuit?

[ItsMyOption]

I can not believe the Ohio group is complying with the order. Not sure what this means if they have a different approach?

Court Docket: #12263 Email

Document Name: Certification of Counsel /Notice of Compliance by Certain Litigation Tracking Warrant Holders with the Order Enforcing the Court's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Confirming the Seventh Amended Joint Plan of Affiliated Debtors Pursuant to Chapter 11 of The United States Bankruptcy Code (related document(s)[12260]) Filed by Stephen Rosenbaum. (McLaughlin, John)


http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229160616000000000001

[linda1]

I expect they will.

For some quirky reason I only receive
the first page of any Ohio filing - even
though I am being billed for multiple
pages. It may have something to do
with my I - Pad.

[ItsMyOption]

I would hope the Ohio group counsel will file something to show why Ohio Judge must overrule JPM request.

All LTW holders that did not opt-in can file claim in any state.

I think JPM is a little worried about this. I would love to see a jury trial against JPM.

[linda1]

Plus if you keep your searches to under $ 15
per quarter - 3 months - there is no charge.

[linda1]

Thanks for the update.

Now the Ohio Judge will
Rule whether or not Judge Walrath's
Order binds the Ohio Court from
proceeding with the Lawsuit.

[linda1]

I agree.

I think it should be up to the Ohio
Judge to decide if Judge Walrath's
Ruling binds his Court from proceeding
with the Lawsuit.

[ItsMyOption]

I agree with you go4awildride, first the JPM counsel are again making this bogus threat of Contempt of court when they are the one that are in Contempt of higher court Judge Block’s ruling.

Second, All LTW holders that did NOT Opt-IN should not be shackled to any so called Delaware Jurisdiction rights. We followed the courts request that we could not intervene until the AWARD was given to a party.

Now that JPM received that AWARD of 538 million we can take our claim to any civil court in any state.All LTW holders that did not opt-in have NO agreement that we must follow the Delaware laws. This is a civil case now, and JPM counsel can take a hike.

We have all seen the corruption, collusion, conflicts of interest, in Delaware, and Judge “W” should be ashamed of it, but instead may be part of it. IMO!

[GO4AWILDRIDE]

Linda

Why would the lawyers give a crap about a judge in another state trying to tell them what they can or can not do in Ohio?

They should just FLIP HER THE BIRD and continue the suit.

WALRAT has no jurisdiction in Ohio.

She is only a Delaware judge.

I don't understand why anyone would take her order seriously in another state.


GO4AWILDRIDE

[goldcanyon341]

Pacer.gov, go there and register to get an account. Once you have an account number and password, Pacer will allow you to search cases in many courts. Investors interested in distressed securities, will find this to be a valuable tool.

The Ohio action is in the 6th Circuit, under the name Rosenbaum, Stephen. The case number is 2:16-CV-00281

[ItsMyOption]

Can you supply the link you saw this at?

I would like too see if I could submit an objection to their JPM request. I have never filed objections in Ohio court, but all the I just need correct address.

I would show it is Judge Walrath and JPM that is in conflict from judge Block ruling.

I will look more at this tomorrow.

[goldcanyon341]

Another JPM filing in Ohio


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
STEPHEN ROSENBAUM, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
Defendant.
Case No. 2:16-cv-281
Judge: George C. Smith
Magistrate Judge: Terence P. Kemp
REPLY MEMORANDUM IN FURTHER
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS
On May 10, 2016, JPMorgan filed a motion to stay this litigation
pending resolution of JPMorgan’s Motion for Enforcement filed
in the Delaware Bankruptcy Court. See Defendant’s
Motion to Stay Proceedings (Docket No. 8) (the “Motion to Stay”).
1 In their opposition, the
Plaintiffs offered no reason why this Court should not stay these proceedings until the Delaware Bankruptcy Court decides the Motion for Enforcement. See generally Plaintiffs’ Memorandum
in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Stay (Docket No. 12).
Instead, Plaintiffs argued the merits of JPMorgan’s Motion for Enforcement and asserted that the Delaware Bankruptcy Court
lacks jurisdiction.
Id.
Since the Plaintiffs filed their opposition, the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted JPMorgan’s Motion for Enforcement
deciding these issues against Plaintiffs.
See Order attached
to Notice of Delaware Bankruptcy Court Ruling (Docket No. 13). In its order, the Delaware Bankruptcy Court found Plaintiffs to be in
contempt of the Bankruptcy Court’s Confirmation
Order and required the Plaintiffs “to dismiss the Complaint with prejudice within fourteen days,”
or by June 20, 2016.
Id. ¶¶ 4-5. If the Plaintiffs’ do not comply with the Delaware Bankruptcy 1
Capitalized but undefined terms in this Reply have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Motion to Stay.
- 2 -
Court’s Order, this Court should
stay the action until they do so.
See Celotex Corp. v. Edwards,514 U.S. 300, 313 (1995) (holding
challenges to a bankruptcy court’s order should be made in
that court and not collaterally attacked in another district court).
JPMorgan should not be required to defend a lawsuit that
Plaintiffs are under court order to dismiss.
For the foregoing reasons, JPMorgan respectfully requests the Court grant the Motion to Stay.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew C. Corcoran
Matthew C. Corcoran (0078236)
(Trial Attorney)
JONES DAY
325 John H. McConnell Boulevard, Suite 600
Columbus, OH 43215
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

[linda1]

I have a pacer account - I'll look into
how to access court transcripts.

[investophil]

Obtaining a transcript of the Court Hearing:

A recording of the court hearing is available on CD for $30. It can be obtained by calling Brandon McCarthy 302.252.2906. Brandon will take the required information and mail out a CD. If Brandon doesn't answer the phone, leave a message and he will get back to you.

If a paper copy in needed, then you need to create an ID on Pacer (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) and pay for the transcript at $.90 per page. Brandon indicated that there are 40 pages so the cost would be $36. If filing anything, then the paper copy may be best. Note that the transcript is free after 90 days or in this case September 2016.

[Tradeinman]

Ilene posted a summary. She did not post an item she was asked not to.

I've been waiting for it.

[ItsMyOption]

can you provide a summery of what you heard or witnessed at the June 2 hearing. Did you talk with any counsel?

[investophil]

IMO -
According to the court clerk, the case was recorded. There may be a way to listen to the audio or at least print a copy. It may be expensive.

You need to go to http://www.pacer.gov for Delaware and register for a Pacer account. Once you sign up and agree to the terms, you can print the pages at a cost. I'm not sure if the recording can be listened to, but I'm trying to determine that.