Opinion
Case No. 04-04522-TLM.
April 26, 2005
SUMMARY ORDER
Debtor Cameron Laney ("Debtor") filed a "Motion to Reinstate Dismissed Case and to Reset 341 Meeting," Doc. No. 11 ("Motion"), alleging he did not receive notice of the 341 meeting and thus did not attend. This Court has held that a "properly executed certificate of mailing creates a presumption of receipt of notice." In re Downey, 00.1 I.B.C.R. 34, 35 (Bankr. D. Idaho 2000) (quoting In re Ware, 98.4 I.B.C.R. 130 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1998)); see also Morris v. Peralta (In re Peralta), 317 B.R. 381, 386 (9th Cir. BAP 2004) ("A certificate of mailing raises the presumption that the documents sent were properly mailed and received."). A party asserting non-receipt bears the burden of rebutting that presumption and, as noted in Downey, "a declaration or affidavit stating that notice was not received" is insufficient in and of itself to rebut the presumption. 00.1 I.B.C.R. at 35.
Here, the Bankruptcy Noticing Center's certificate of mailing, Doc. No. 3, states that Debtor was served by first class mail at 224 Douglas Rd, Ontario, OR 97914, the address he listed in his petition, Doc. No. 1. Thus, a presumption of receipt arises. Pursuant to Downey, Debtor's bare assertion in his Motion that he did not receive notice is insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service. Therefore, Debtor's Motion is DENIED.