Foreign debtor did not list noteholders and indenture trustee and only listed the issuer as creditors on the Record and Report submitted to administrators at the creditor verification meeting. Noteholders claim the foreign proceeding is not a "collective" proceeding because their right to vote was eliminated in the foreign proceeding. The foreign proceeding deemed collective because the rights and obligations of all creditors were considered in the foreign court. The objection is not about whether the foreign proceeding is a collective proceeding, but instead about who is allowed to vote a particular debt. Other factors support that a collective proceeding including that notice provided to creditors, the appellate review of the trial court's decision and the priority scheme in the foreign proceeding.
