THOMAS TUCKER, Bankruptcy Judge
This case comes before the Court on "Motion to Reinstate Chapter 13 Bankruptcy," filed on February 2, 2007 (Docket # 26), which this Court construes as a motion for reconsideration, and
The Court having reviewed and considered the motion for reconsideration, and
The Court finds the motion fails to demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties have been misled, and that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. See Local Rule 9024-1(c).
The Court further notes that in this case, the Debtor filed a motion to extend the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3) on January 11, 2007 (Docket #14). The Court set a hearing on that motion for February 1, 2007, but that hearing was cancelled due to the dismissal of this case on January 26, 2007. Any hearing on the motion to extend the automatic stay would have to be concluded within 30 days after this case was filed on January 4, 2007, i.e., no later than February 5, 2007. See 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(B). It would obviously be impossible to do this now, even if this case were reinstated in response to the motion to reinstate (which was filed on Friday, February 2, 2007 at 4:24 p.m.) So, even if this case were reinstated now, Debtor's motion to extend the stay would have to be denied.
NOW, THEREFORE,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration should be, and hereby is, DENIED.