You need to understand that a Proof of Claim is essentially a "claim." Anyone can file a "claim," but does not necessarily entitle them to any recovery if they are not entitled to it.
For example, Texas filed a $35 Proof of Claim for services that WMI never received. The services performed were to WMB, but JPM was the ultimate beneficiary for services rendered. Texas should filed the claim within the Receivership of WMB for invoiced JPM direclty.
Other examples include WMI stating that some of the services WMI were paid by WMI but the ultimate beneficiary was actually WMB and therefore JP Morgan's debts.
There is more to this Proof of Claim than I would like to type since my typing skills are lacking.
Without looking into the structure of WMI and its various entities/subsidiaries, Boilermakers should (may) have made a claim within the Receivership of the FDIC.
Essentially, Boilermaker is, in my opinion, making claim every where and anywhere to preserve their rights, which they may or may not have.
WMI and its attorneys have the final say as to weather or not the claim is valid, especially if it was to the correct entity.
In my opinion, Weil will Reject said claim because it was based on certain securities from other entities of WMI and not WMI directly. (I did not see WMI name in the pleading, but I did not check thoroughly.)
Anyhow, "don't get your panties in a bunch." Remember, ANYONE can file a Claim. You, me and Dupree. Anyone . . .
The above is my opinion.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
