In re Pacheco

         NOT FOR PUBLICATION

         Attorney for Debtors: D. J. Rausa, Esq. Law Offices of D. J. Rausa

         Chapter 13 Trustee: David L. Skelton, Esq.

         ORDER ON COUNSEL'S REQUEST FOR FEES

         Peter W. Bowie, Chief Judge United States Bankruptcy Court

         This matter came on regularly for hearing on the Chapter 13 Trustee's Motion to Dismiss. That matter was resolved. Debtors' counsel requested $550 in fees for the opposition, which exceeded the presumptive fee then in effect of $425. The Court took the request under submission because the full Court was then in the process of reviewing all the Chapter 13 presumptive fees, and has since done so.

         This case was filed in March, 2004. Efforts were made in 2006 to have the plan payments made by an earnings withholding order (EWO) served on Debtor's employer, but those efforts were unavailing. In November, 2 006 the trustee filed a motion to dismiss, which was heard in January, 2007. Further efforts were made to have payments made through on EWO. In the meantime, a relief from stay motion resulted in an adequate protection order.

         On August 15, 2007, another motion to dismiss was filed by the Chapter 13 Trustee. While that was pending, the lender sought and got relief from stay for breach of the adequate protection order. The motion to dismiss was initially heard on October 23, 2 007, then was continued one week to October 30, after which it was resolved.

         At the hearing on October 30, after counsel made his request for $550 in fees, the Court asked what was unusual or unique about the opposition in this case that would take it outside the ordinary, regularly compensated at the presumptive fee. Counsel responded that he had to meet with his clients multiple times to prepare and present this opposition. Counsel made clear then, as well as on earlier occasions that he believed the presumptive fees were generally insufficient. Indeed, many of the then-applicable presumptive fees have been increased since.

         The Court has reviewed the docket of this case, the opposition filed by counsel for the debtors, and considered counsel's argument. The Court has found nothing that establishes something unusual, unique or extraordinary about the opposition to the August 2007 motion to dismiss. Accordingly, the presumptive fee is appropriate which, at the time, was $425.

         Accordingly, fees for counsel's opposition to the motion to dismiss are allowed in the amount of $425.00.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.

         CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

         The undersigned, a regularly appointed and qualified clerk in the office of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California, at San Diego, hereby certifies that a true copy of the attached document, to wit:

         ORDER ON COUNSEL'S REQUEST FOR FEES was enclosed in a sealed envelope bearing the lawful frank of the Bankruptcy Judges and mailed to each of the parties at their respective address listed below:

         Said envelope(s) containing such document were deposited by me in a regular United States mail box in the City of San Diego, in said district on March 4, 2008.

         Barbara J. Kelly, Judicial Assistant