--

This seems like it could be one of those cases that is structured backwards, or as some English practitioners refer to the backwards case structuring - round tripping of the U.S. debt. The court closes the hearing with that parties shouldn't rely on what the court did in this case as precedent for future cases.

Per Google AI:

Fossil (UK) Global Services Ltd. is a UK subsidiary of the fashion accessories company Fossil Group, Inc. that has recently been involved in a debt restructuring. It is now the entity used for the UK restructuring plan which was sanctioned by the High Court of Justice in England and Wales, and also recognized by a U.S. bankruptcy court. The restructuring plan involved canceling $150 million in unsecured notes and issuing new notes to create a more durable capital structure.

• Purpose: The entity was created to implement a restructuring plan in the UK to deal with the company's debt.
• Restructuring details: The plan was a court-sanctioned restructuring of $150 million in unsecured notes, with the High Court sanctioning the plan in early November 2025.
• International recognition: Fossil (UK) Global Services Ltd. also sought and received recognition of its UK restructuring plan from a U.S. bankruptcy court under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This ensures the plan is binding on U.S. creditors.
• Legal status: The company was registered in the UK on August 8, 2025. It is a private limited company with a registered office in Milton Keynes.
• Information: For investors holding the notes, an information agent is available for password-protected website access, and more information can be found on the Fossil Group's investor relations page.

November 12, 2025 Houston bankruptcy court hearing in the Klöckner Pentaplast bankruptcy case.

Re bankruptcy sale of Marineland assets in Florida

The subject matter of the hearing is sale of the company in the US bankruptcy.

Sorry the volume is low. This is the court recording that was docketed on November 10 as docket number 725. https://veritaglobal.net/dolphinco/document/list/6300

For more information about the bankrupt company see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kl%C3%B6ckner_Pentaplast

For more information about the bankruptcy filing see article on www.plasticstoday.com below:

Klöckner Pentaplast, a global packaging and specialty film manufacturer, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Part of a comprehensive financial restructuring plan, the filing will reduce the company's funded debt by approximately €1.3 billion ($1.5 billion).

The company and certain subsidiaries voluntarily initiated the prepackaged Chapter 11 process in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. Under the restructuring agreement, ownership of the company will transfer to certain Klöckner Pentaplast partners following completion of the process.

https://www.plasticstoday.com/medical/kl-ckner-pentaplast-enters-chapter-11-restructuring-to-reduce-1-3-billion-debt

This is the official court audio recording, from the U.S. Supreme Court website:

supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-1287

This is the official court audio, posted by the court this afternoon. The appellate argument therein is the appeal of Sam Bankman-Fried’s criminal conviction proceeded this morning, before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The argument was scheduled for 20 minutes or so and went beyond an hour. The bench was a hot bench, with the judges on the panel prepared to ask a lot of questions.

Maybe the case will be resolved consensually?

The appellant’s side, SBF’s counsel, argued to the appellate judges that more evidence of advice of counsel would have changed the jury’s decision to convict. The judges were skeptical.

But the appellee, the government, had a hard time justifying the forfeiture order against Sam Bankman-Fried, which was part of his punishment.

There is a disconnect between the presentation of massive losses in the record of the criminal trial relative to representations of customers being paid in full in the FTX bankruptcy. This was discussed at some length during the argument today. I am not sure it is correct that the FTX customers who are to receive (the low) cash value of Crypto as of 11/11/2022 (the FTX bankruptcy filing date, on Veterans Day, during Crypto Winter) are expected to receive the current value of the Crypto or more in the future. So maybe a fact check of the FTX bankruptcy plan would be helpful.

More generally, how well the FTX bankruptcy is going/supposed to have gone in terms of paying customers in full seems to undermine at least the forfeiture order. It is not unusual that there is interplay between a criminal case and a bankruptcy case/appeal, proceeding on separate tracks but inter-related factually.

I think there could possibly be a motion for new trial at the district court level regardless of the outcome of the appeal, based on the ability to seek a new trial where there is newly discovered evidence… where the interests of Justice require, etc. even where there was a lot of evidence at trial, evidence in support of a jury verdict.

The appellate argument today raises questions like how much does acting on advice of counsel count? Is a person who has lawyers acting more in good faith than a person who doesn’t have lawyers? Like can a person hire lawyers to set up a business or help as it grows and be excused from criminal responsibility? If so - to what extent? One view expressed during the oral argument today was that it may depend on whether the lawyers know what the client was up to, but that is not something that would usually come into evidence at trial because of privilege issues.

This was a fascinating argument. I don’t know if it is what SBF wanted to be represented to the court. Is this how he was told his case would be presented? Or does he have the same problem again, where the FTX bankruptcy case was allegedly described to him as planned a certain way, but then the case went another way and he was arrested and blamed for the collapse of FTX.

Wasn’t he told that a bankruptcy would help liquidity, to monetize FTX assets so that customers could be paid? And then he handed over control of the company, which he laments. The pressure must have been very great, with the other FTX executives blaming him and a bankruptcy presented as a way to stabilize FTX’s business and avoid customer losses… and lawyers telling him what to do.

I am concerned for pressure SBF is under from lawyers - BECAUSE he does rely on advice of counsel, now as he must - and his emotional health and well being must be under so much pressure.

With potential for the SBF case to be heard by the US Supreme Court or a retrial or a pardon, the stakes are high. And with billions at stake in the forfeiture order, based on losses at time of trial that have been reduced, there seems a lot of room for compromise and come to an agreement that resolves the appeal.

--

--