Do you think this is OK?

[jessegirl]

So I go on Pacer last night and I see an update. Now i am shixxng cause I am not sure what to expect and there was a abandoment of property from the Reg. trustee, saying she abanded my property. Is that odd that this would show up now? Since my case was extended by the UST and not be the reg. trustee? My reg. discharge was 1/6. Would this also look good for us in the UST eyes? Just looking for some feedback on what you all think.

Thanks :-)

[justbroke]

An Motion to Abandon Property is normal, and even good in some cases! It means that the U.S. Trustee wants nothing to do with a particular piece of property, and is revesting it with the Debtor.

In other words, if this were a house (which is usually what this is used for), it means that it's yours and the Trustee doesn't want to sell it.

[jessegirl]

An Motion to Abandon Property is normal, and even good in some cases! It means that the U.S. Trustee wants nothing to do with a particular piece of property, and is revesting it with the Debtor.

In other words, if this were a house (which is usually what this is used for), it means that it's yours and the Trustee doesn't want to sell it.

Does this have anything to do with the UST extending my discharge date? In other words will this help me with the UST possibly trying to dismiss us and for a 707?

[justbroke]

Does this have anything to do with the UST extending my discharge date? In other words will this help me with the UST possibly trying to dismiss us a 707?

No. This is irrelevant as to an extension on a discharge date or as to a dismissal for abuse. This is simply, that the Trustee wants nothing to do with a particular piece of property.