THOMAS TUCKER, Bankruptcy Judge
On January 8, 2008, Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 7, initiating this case. On April 15, 2008, the Court entered an order granting Debtor a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727, and the bankruptcy case was closed. On May 23, 2008, Debtor filed a document entitled, "Debtor's Motion To Reopen Chapter 7 Case To Set Aside Discharge and File Reaffirmation Agreement" (Docket # 21). The motion states, in relevant part: "That the Debtor would like to set aside his discharge for the sole purposes of filing the Reaffirmation Agreement with Ford Motor Credit Company to reaffirm on the auto loan for his 2003 Mercury Sable in order to retain said auto." (Mot. to Reopen at ¶ 5.) On July 2, 2008, Debtor filed a Certificate of No Response, indicating that no one had objected to the motion.
Under 11 U.S.C. § 524(c)(1), a reaffirmation agreement is not enforceable unless it "was made before the granting of the discharge under section 727." Because the motion fails to demonstrate that Debtor and Ford Motor Credit Company made the reaffirmation at issue before Debtor was granted a discharge on April 15, 2008, the motion fails to demonstrate that there can be an enforceable reaffirmation agreement between these parties. Setting aside the discharge, as Debtor seeks to do, would not cure this problem. The historical fact is that the discharge was granted on April 15, 2008, and vacating the discharge would not change that historical fact and its impact under § 524(c)(1).
For these reasons, no purpose would be served by reopening this bankruptcy case.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that "Debtor's Motion To Reopen Chapter 7 Case To Set Aside Discharge and File Reaffirmation Agreement" (Docket # 21), is DENIED.