BARRY SCHERMER, Bankruptcy Judge
Upon the Motion of John Choates ("Choates"), for his Motion for Leave to File Proof of Claim Out of Time (the "Motion"), and upon the Objection to the Motion filed by Thermadyne Holding Corporation, et al. (the "Debtors"), and upon the record herein; and after due deliberation thereon; and good and sufficient cause appearing therefore,
IT IS HEREBY FOUND THAT:
1. This Court has core jurisdiction to hear this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) and 1334. The statutory predicates governing the matter are Section 501 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the "Bankruptcy Code") and Rules 3003 and 9006 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
2. This Court retains jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Article XII of the Debtors' First Amended and Restated Joint Plan of Reorganization Under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code dated January 17, 2003 (the "Plan"), as confirmed by this Court pursuant to that Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a) and (b) and F.R.Bankr.P. 3020 Confirming the Debtors' First Amended and Restated Joint Plan of Reorganization Under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code dated April 3, 2003 (the "Confirmation Order").
3. The Debtors filed their voluntary petitions on November 19, 2001.
4. The Debtors filed their Plan on January 17, 2003, which was approved and confirmed by the Confirmation Order on April 3, 2003. The Effective Date, as defined in the Plan, was May 23, 2003.
5. The deadline to file proofs of claim in these cases was April 19, 2002 (the "Bar Date"). Notice of the Bar Date was mailed out to all parties listed on the Matrix in early February. Notice was also published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the Wall Street Journal. A Notice of the Bar Date was mailed to the attorney for Choates on February 6, 2002. Counsel to Choates received also notice of the Confirmation Hearing on January 31, 2003.
6. Choates filed a motion for leave to file a late claim, to continue with a personal injury lawsuit against the Debtors.
7. Choates cannot establish excusable neglect for his failure to file a timely claim in these bankruptcy proceedings.
8. Under the Supreme Court case of Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Assoc. Limited Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 113 S.Ct. 1489 (1993), a bankruptcy court may accept a late proof of claim where the claimant can prove excusable neglect. While excusable neglect is a flexible standard, inadvertence, ignorance of the rules and mistakes construing the rules do not usually constitute "excusable" neglect. Id. at 391.
9. The determination of whether the neglect in failing to file a proof of claim is excusable is an equitable consideration, taking into account all of the relevant circumstances. Id. at 395. The factors considered by courts include: (i) the danger of prejudice to the debtor, (ii) the length of the delay and its potential impact on judicial proceedings, (iii) the reason for the delay, including whether it was within the reasonable control of the movant, and (iv) whether the movant acted in good faith. Id.
10. The Court finds that Choates had the ability to file a proof of claim timely, as it was always in his control whether to file a claim or sue the Debtors.
11. Prejudice to the Debtors includes prejudice to the creditor body, and the Court finds that permitting Choates to file a late claim would constitute a prejudice to the Debtors' creditors.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
12. The Motion is denied.