The Order denying the Coalition's motion for fees under sections 363 and 503 is a final order. See In re Taylor, 913 F.2d 102, 104 (3d Cir. 1990) (holding an order is final and immediately appealable if it “fully and finally resolved a discrete set of issues, leaving no related issues for later determination”); cf. In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., 648 Fed.Appx. 277,280 n.4 (3d Cir. 2016) (acknowledging this Court's appellate jurisdiction over bankruptcy court's order approving § 363(b) motion); Lebron, 27 F.3d 937 (reviewing order denying administrative expense request under §§ 503(b)(3)(D) and (b)(4) without addressing finality).
The settlement by itself is not proof that the Strougo Plaintiffs were denied anything. SeeIn re Washington Mutual, Inc. , 442 B.R. 314, 355-56 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011) ("Providing different treatment to a creditor who agrees to settle instead of litigating is permitted by section 1123(a)(4)."); Energy Future Holdings Corp. v. Del. Tr. Co. , 648 F. App'x 277, 284 (3d Cir. 2016) ("[M]ere differences in potential final outcomes resulting from choices made by individual creditors do not violate the equal treatment protections of § 1123(a)(4)."). Notably, the Pension Trust has already returned an opt out form (see discussion infra at 877–78).
See In re Washington Mutual, Inc., 442 B.R. 314, 355-56 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011) ("Providing different treatment to a creditor who agrees to settle instead of litigating is permitted by section 1123(a)(4)."); Energy Future Holdings Corp. v. Del. Tr. Co., 648 Fed.Appx. 277, 284 (3d Cir. 2016) ("[M]ere differences in potential final outcomes resulting from choices made by individual creditors do not violate the equal treatment protections of § 1123(a)(4).")
See, e.g., Adeli v. Barclay (In re Berkeley Del. Court, LLC), 834 F.3d 1036, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2016). See, e.g., Del. Trust Co. v. Energy Future Intermediate Holdings, LLC (In re Energy Future Holding Corp.), 527 B.R. 157, 162-67 (D. Del. 2015), aff'd, 648 F. App'x 277 (3d Cir. 2016). See, e.g.