The vast majority of cases that have considered whether to grant a debtor a continuance to obtain credit counseling even though the debtor has failed to certify an attempt to obtain such counseling pre-petition, have ruled against the debtor for failure to comply with § 109(h)(3)(A)(ii). See Clippard v. Bass, 2007 WL 913929, at * 4 (W.D. Tenn March 13, 2007); In re Duplessis, 2007 WL 118945, at *3 (Bankr. D. Mass. January 11, 2007); In reMcBride, 354 B.R. 95, 99 (Bankr. D. S.C. 2006); In re Wilson, 346 B.R. 59, 62 (Bankr. N.D. N.Y. 2006) (denying motion for exigent circumstances as debtors made no attempt to seek counseling pre-petition); In re Carr, 344 B.R. 774, 775 (Bankr. N.D. W.Va. 2006) (notwithstanding exigent circumstances, extension not warranted where no attempt to seek counseling pre-petition); In re Latovljevic, 343 B.R. 817, 822 (Bankr. N.D. W.Va. 2006); In re Carey, 341 B.R. 798, 802-03 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2006); In re Raymond, 2006 WL 1047033 (Bankr. D. N.H. April 12, 2006) (finding filer not entitled to exemption or extension as no representation about credit counseling); In re Givhan, 2006 WL 4451481, at *1 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. March 23, 2006) (ruling certification insufficient as failed to allege a request for counseling); In re Dansby, 340 B.R. 564, 568 (Bankr. D. S.C. 2006); In re Tomco, 339 B.R. 145 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2006); In re Ross, 338 B.R. 134, 135 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2006); In re Childs, 335 B.R. 623, 630 (Bankr. D. Md. 2005); In re Cleaver, 333 B.R. 430, 435 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2005); In re Gee, 332 B.R. 602, 604 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2005); In re Watson, 332 B.R. 740, 745-6 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2005). The Debtor is correct that when interpreting 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)
Complete waiver of the credit counseling requirement is granted only in the extreme circumstances listed in § 109(h)(4) — incapacity, disability, or active military duty in a military combat zone. See In re Carr, 344 B.R. 774, 775-76 (Bankr. N.D.W.Va. 2006). A debtor's incarceration has been determined to be an insufficient circumstance to qualify for a complete waiver of the requirement.
The court, however, dismissed that case because the Debtor had failed to meet the eligibility requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 109(h) inasmuch as he had failed to obtain pre-petition, non-profit, approved, budget and credit counseling services. See In re Carr, No. 06-189 (Bankr. N.D.W. Va. May 3, 2006). After filing his March 20, 2006 bankruptcy petition, the Debtor obtained the requisite credit counseling services in compliance with 11 U.S.C. § 109(h).