# Opinion > United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · February 4, 2026 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11250933 ## Case - **Full name:** In re: 382 Channel Drive LLC, f/k/a Publishers Clearing House LLC, et al. - **Court:** United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York - **Decided:** February 4, 2026 - **Opinion:** 100trialcourt - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11250933 ## Opinion text UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------------x In re: NOT FOR PUBLICATION 382 CHANNEL DRIVE LLC, Chapter 11 f/k/a PUBLISHERS CLEARING HOUSE LLC, et al. Case No. 25-10694 (MG) Debtors. -----------------------------------------------------------------------x MEMORANDUM OPINION SUSTAINING THE DEBTOR’S FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD OMNIBUS CLAIM OBJECTIONS A P P E A R A N C E S: KLESTADT WINTERS JURELLER SOUTHARD & STEVENS, LLP Attorneys for 382 Channel Drive LLC 200 West 41st Street 17th Floor New York, NY 10036-7203 By: Tracy L. Klestadt, Esq. Lauren C. Kiss, Esq. Stephanie R. Sweeney, Esq. Andrew Brown, Esq. BERRY LAW & ACCOUNTING Attorney for Marquise Latrel Nelson 625 Clay Street, Arkadelphia, AR 71923 By: Morgan A Berry, Esq. ALOYSUIS AGADA Pro Se Claimant GA LAGBARA Pro Se Claimant SONYA GONZALES Pro Se Claimant MARTIN GLENN CHIEF UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Pending before the Court are the first, second, and third omnibus claims objections (the “First Omnibus Objection,” ECF Doc. # 293; the “Second Omnibus Objection,” ECF Doc. # 294; the “Third Omnibus Objection,” ECF Doc. # 297; collectively the “Omnibus Objections”) of the debtor 382 Channel Drive LLC, f/k/a Publishers Clearing House LLC (the “Debtor” or “PCH”) for the entry of orders disallowing and expunging certain claims (each, collectively, the “Claims”) from the Debtor’s claims register. (First Omnibus Objection at 2; Second Omnibus Objection at 2; Third Omnibus Objection at 2.) The Objections were each filed with respective proposed orders (the “First Proposed Order,” ECF Doc. # 293-2; the “Second Proposed Order,” ECF Doc. # 294-2; the “Third Proposed Order,” ECF Doc. # 297-2; collectively the “Proposed Orders”) listing the Claims specific to each objection. Also included with each Omnibus Objection is a declaration of William H. Henrich, co-chief restructuring officer of the Debtor (the “First Henrich Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 293-3; the “Second Henrich Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 294-3; the “Third Henrich Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 297-3). The objection deadline for all Omnibus Objections was January 2, 2026. Three timely responses from named claimants (collectively, the “Responses”) were received: Claimant Claim No. Basis for Claim Response(s) by Objection Claimant Aloysius Agada 247 (the “Agada Unliquidated EFC Doc. ## 300, Claim”) Late Filed 307, 314, 316, 328, and 330; 337 and 347 were received after the objection deadline Ga Lagbara 136, 194, and 212 Unsupported by the Claimant mailed (collectively, the Debtor’s Books and response, which “Lagbara Claims”) Records was received by Late Filed Debtor’s counsel on January 2, 2026 and filed by Debtor, ECF Doc. # 343-1 Sonya Gonzales 236 (the “Gonzales Unsupported by the ECF Doc. ## 299, Claim”) Debtor’s Books and 301, 302, and 320; Records 353 was received Late Filed after the objection deadline Three additional responses were timely filed by Prize Winner 1, Prize Winner 14 and Prize Winner 32, of which the Plan Administrator has adjourned his reply with respect to the claims. (Reply (defined infra) at 2 n.1.) One untimely response was received six (6) days after the objection deadline from claimant Marquise Latrel Nelson in response to claim No. 59 (the “Nelson Claim”) (the “Nelson Response,” ECF Doc. # 338). On January 9, 2026, the Debtor replied to the three timely Responses (the “Reply,” ECF Doc. # 343) and filed three supporting declarations: Declaration of Michael Cooper in Support of the Debtor's First Omnibus Objection (the “Cooper Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 344); Declaration of Stephanie Sweeney in Support of Debtor's First Omnibus Objection (the “Sweeny Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 345); and Declaration of Paul H. Deutch in Support of Debtor's First Omnibus Objection (the “Deutch Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 346). The Debtor filed a supplemental reply to the Nelson Response (the “Supp. Reply,” ECF Doc. # 354) and included a supporting declaration from Michael Cooper, former PCH employee for over twenty (20) years (the “Cooper Supp. Decl.,” ECF Doc. # 355). For the reasons explained below, the Objections to claims are SUSTAINED. I. BACKGROUND A. General Background PCH was founded as a partnership between Harold and LuEsther Mertz in 1953, operating as a magazine subscription business out of the family home. The company was reformed as a New York limited partnership in 1957 and then converted into a New York limited liability company in 2002. (“Disclosure Statement,” ECF Doc. # 271.) As the Company grew, PCH introduced its first direct mail sweepstakes starting in 1967. When coupled with TV advertising and increased name recognition thanks to the PCH “Prize Patrol” and their “iconic Big Check,” the company experienced extended growth. (Id. at 5-6.) By the 1990s, PCH began to diversify their offerings, first by adding digital marketing and acquiring websites offering online games, quizzes, sweepstakes, and a search engine. (Id. at 6-7). In 2017 revenue for PCH neared $1 billion. (Id. at 7). However, shifts in consumer behavior and the rise of major commerce platforms such as Amazon and Walmart resulted in decreasing consumer demand and revenue within the company’s commerce business. As a result, PCH wound down its commerce division in 2024 and shifted to offering free-to-play, chance-to-win digital games and entertainment across a network of web and app-based entertainment properties. (Id.) These websites and apps attracted approximately 36 million customers in 2024, allowing the company to serve targeted advertising to these users and maximize ad revenue by offering attractive placements to advertisers. (Id.) B. Relevant Case History On April 9, 2025 (the “Petition Date”), the Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. (Voluntary Petition, ECF Doc. # 1 ¶ 3.) The Debtor continued to operate its business and manage its property as a debtor in possession pursuant to sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. (Id., at ¶ 4.) On April 24, 2025, the U.S. Trustee appointed the official committee of unsecured Creditors (the “Committee”). (First Omnibus Objection ¶ 5.) On May 21, 2025, the Court entered the Order Establishing Deadline for Filing Proofs of Claim and Approving the Form and Manner of Notice Thereof (the “Bar Date Order,” ECF Doc. # 115) fixing a deadline (the “Bar Date”), establishing procedures for filing proofs of claim against the Debtor and its estate pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3003(c)(3) and approving the form and manner of service thereof. The Bar Date Order fixed July 14, 2025, at 5:00 P.M. as the Bar Date by which all Claims which arose prior to April 9, 2025, other than those types of Claims specifically excepted thereby, had to be filed. The Bar Date Order also set a Bar Date of October 6, 2025 with respect to governmental entities. On August 2, 2025, the Court entered the Order Approving Omnibus Claim Objection Procedures (the “Omnibus Claim Objection Procedures Order,” ECF Doc. # 237.) According to the Amended Disclosure Statement (ECF Doc. # 280) filed on October 30, 2025, approximately 200 claims were filed against the Debtor: (i) five (5) administrative claims in the amount of approximately $5 million and other unliquidated amounts; (ii) three (3) secured claims in the amount of approximately $20,000 and other unliquidated amounts; (iii) approximately 65 priority claims in the amount of approximately $1.5 million; and (iv) approximately 180 general unsecured claims in the amount of approximately $3.7 billion. (ECF Doc. # 280, at 9.) On December 22, 2025, the Court entered a Memorandum Opinion (ECF Doc. # 325) and Order (ECF Doc. # 326) confirming the Debtor’s amended liquidation plan. C. The First Omnibus Objection 1. Debtors Objection On November 18, 2025, the Debtor filed the First Omnibus Objection seeking an order to disallow and expunge the following claims: (i) the unliquidated claims identified on Schedule 1 to the First Proposed Order (collectively, the “Unliquidated Claims”); (ii) the claims identified on Schedule 2 to the First Proposed Order for which insufficient support was provided and for which the Debtor’s books and records reflect no obligation (collectively, the “Unsupported Claims”); and (iii) the late filed claims identified on Schedule 3 to the First Proposed Order (collectively, the “Late Filed Claims”). (First Omnibus Objection at 2.) According to the First Omnibus Objection and First Henrich Decl., the Debtor has received the proofs of claim filed and found that the Unliquidated Claims listed on Schedule 1 to the First Proposed Order either leave open or unliquidated the amount claimed, and/or do not contain adequate supporting documents or facts to verify the claimed amounts. (First Henrich Decl. ¶ 6.) According to Schedule 1 to the First Proposed Order, there were 43 Unliquidated Claims filed. (First Proposed Order, Schedule 1.) The Debtor has determined that its books and records do not reflect owing to the claimants of the Unsupported Claims listed on Schedule 2 to the First Proposed Order. (First Henrich Decl. ¶ 7.) According to Schedule 2, there are 13 Unsupported Claims. (First Proposed Order, Schedule 2.) Finally, the Debtor seeks to have all Late Filed Claims, which the Debtor defines as filed after the Bar Date, disallowed and expunged. (Henrich Decl. ¶ 8.) There are 25 claims listed in Schedule 3 of the First Proposed Order that the Debtor seeks to be disallowed and expunged as Late Filed Claims. (First Proposed Order, Schedule 3.) 2. Various Claimant’s Reponses a. Aloysius Agada Aloysus Agada (“Mr. Agada”) has filed nine (9) documents on the docket responding to the First Omnibus Objection and the Debtor’s basis for objecting to his claim as an Unliquidated Claim. While each of the filed documents differ slightly, Mr. Agada’s general argument is largely the same throughout. According to Mr. Agada, he received a letter in April 2023 from Susan Williamson, former Vice President of the PCH, which he claims confirms he won a $20 million award. (ECF Doc. #314.) According to a later filing, Mr. Agada states that he spoke with Debtor’s counsel who informed Mr. Agada that the letter appears to be promotional material from PCH. (ECF Doc. #328.) Mr. Agada vehemently disagrees with that characterization. (/d.) A copy of the letter Mr. Agada claims is from Ms. Williamson is below: St nual be eptiling te hear. Ihe good news |6 (hal wilh only days tell belore we cul [he prize checks, you, Aloysius Agada, are delinilely in the running lo win our $15,000,000,00 Prize of a Lifelirme on April GOlh (Gwy. #21000). ‘Yes, I'm pleased lo confirm: an eniry has been successluly processed in your name, and just days rom now, you could be |he one celebraling wilh lhe PCH SupeyPrize thal everyone wants to win, We're exciled, loo, You see, in jus! days we'll be filing in a name on a prize check, and now we've auihorized even more money lhan you may have seen in olher nolices. SI Nee aaa acaba 2/alo huge! We've upgraded our Prize of a Lifetime by $5,000,000.00 -- THE HIGHEST UPGRADED AMOUNT we're offering for this incredible prize! eS ae WYouu/ More than enough to buy a new car! Bul understand, if you wanl to win and have all |he exira money approved {rom this Nolice made oul in your name, Aloysius -- you mus! respond here -- AND RIGHT AWAY. The April 281h entry deadiine Is in effect. □ Hy | liam (Lilbewam. Vice President b. Sonya Gonzales a.k.a. Sonya Valenzuela Sonya Gonzales a.k.a. Sonya Valenzuela (““Ms. Gonzales”) has filed five (5) documents on the docket responding to the First Omnibus Objection and the Debtor’s basis for objecting to her claim as an Unsecured Claim and a Late Filed Claim. According to Ms. Gonzales, she did not receive notice of the Debtor’s Chapter 11 filing, and emails to both Counsel for the Debtor and the Claims agent went unanswered until the bar date had passed. (ECF Doc. # 299 at 2.) Ms. Gonzales contends that while the Debtor has records of her claim being $1.07, she has a good faith basis for her $54 million claim. (/d. at Ex. A.) She claims that she received mail, calls, and text messages from PCH confirming her winnings. (/d. at Ex. B.) She has included screenshots of the conversations she had with PCH, including the below message: 15694 a 6