First of all, I want the Judge to deny this POR as much as anyone. But, again, I took the Judge's comment as more of putting Rosen on notice that he needed to meet the requirements of the process. She gave him very direct instructions of what he must submit for her to "consider" his plan.
I equate it to applying for a loan. In order to be considered you have to submit "x" number of items that the lender requires. Doesn't mean you are going to be approved ... just means it meets the requirement for the consideration.
Here's another comment the Judge made just right before hers and Rosen's discussion on the additional settlements being added in.
It's at @ 8:40 on the audio playback and was in response to the BNY Mellon lawyer who spoke for one of the noteholders group about the "payover" for those electing stock and his attempt to make sure it's handled before the "effective date".
The Judge's comment back was:
"Well, it may be decided before the confirmation date … I’m not sure I’ll be entering an order tomorrow."
If the confirmation date is the day on which she approves the plan that doesn't sound like it will be happening today since she stated his stock problem may be decided before then.
I believe she'll thoroughly review all information from the hearings in conjunction with Rosen's Plan to make her decision, which may not be an absolute "approve" or "deny".
How many times yesterday did Chad Smith say (mainly in reference to the releases) that those would be modified by the Judge? If she does modify those releases ... wonder how they will affect the GSA?? If there's no GSA, there's no POR ... right??
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
