Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Transcription

1 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re : Chapter 11 : EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES : Case No: (KJC) : Debtor. : Hearing Date: November 14, 10:00 a.m. : Objection Deadline: November 7, 4:00 p.m. THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE S OBJECTION TO THE INTERIM APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION (FIRST) OF SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 10, 2013 TO AUGUST 31, 2013 (D. I. 904) Roberta A. DeAngelis, the United States Trustee for Region 3 ( U. S. Trustee ), by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby files this Objection to the Interim Application for Compensation (First) of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP for the Period June 10, 2013 to August 31, 2013 (D. I. 904) ( First Interim Application ) and in support thereof states as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. This Court has jurisdiction to hear the above-referenced Objection. 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 586, the U. S. Trustee is charged with the administrative oversight of cases commenced pursuant to title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. This duty is part of the U. S. Trustee s overarching responsibility to enforce the bankruptcy laws as written by Congress and interpreted by the courts. See United States Trustee v. Columbia Gas Sys., Inc. (In re Columbia Gas Sys., Inc.), 33 F.3d 294, (3d Cir. 1994) (noting that U. S. Trustee has public interest standing under 11 U.S.C. 307, which goes beyond mere pecuniary interest); Morgenstern v. Revco D.S., Inc. (In re Revco D.S., Inc.), 898 F.2d 498, 500 (6th Cir. 1990) (describing the U. S. Trustee as a watchdog ).

2 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 2 of Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 307, the U. S. Trustee has standing to be heard with regard to the Objection. RELEVANT FACTS AND BACKGROUND 4. On June 10, 2013, the Debtor filed a voluntary chapter 11 petition (the Chapter 11 Case ). On June 18, 2013, the U.S. Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the Creditors Committee ) pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section On June 19, 2013, the Debtor filed an application for an order authorizing it to retain Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP ( Skadden ) as its restructuring counsel, effective nunc pro tunc to June 10, On July 10, 2013, the Court entered an order authorizing the Debtor to employ Skadden as its counsel. (D. I. 326). 6. On July 10, 2013, this Court entered an Order Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections 105(a) and 331 Establishing Interim Compensation Procedures (the Interim Compensation Procedures Order ), which sets forth the procedures for interim compensation and reimbursement of expenses for all professionals in this case. (D. I. 330). Under the Interim Compensation Procedures Order, Skadden seeks interim approval of the full amount of the fees and expenses requested in the Skadden monthly fee applications filed for the months of June, July, and August 2013 (the Monthly Fee Applications ), and authorization for the Debtor to pay the amounts requested in full. Skadden s Monthly Fee Applications filed to date are identified as set forth below: Date Filed D. I. Period Involved Fees Requested Expenses Fees Paid Expenses Paid Requested 7/25/ /10/13-6/30/13 $1,269, (80% $22, $1,269, $22, of $1,586,286.25) 8/25/ /1/13-7/31/13 $1,341, (80% $24, $1,341, $24, of $1,676,758.75) 9/25/ /1/13-8/31/13 $922, (80% of $1,153,452.25) $39, Pending Pending 2

3 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 3 of On October 17, 2013, Skadden filed its First Interim Application for the first interim fee period from June 10, 2013 through August 31, 2013 seeking allowance of $4,416, in fees and $86, in expenses (D. I.904). 8. The U. S. Trustee has reviewed the First Interim Application and raises the following issues and lodges the following objections. LAW AND ANALYSIS U.S.C. 330(a)(1) provides that after notice and a hearing, the court may award to a professional person employed under 327 reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered by such a professional person. 11 U.S.C. 330(a)(1) U.S.C. 330(a)(3)(A) - (E) provides as that in determining the amount of reasonable compensation to be awarded, the court shall consider the nature, the extent, and the value of such services, taking into account all relevant factors, including the time spent on such services; the rates charged for such services; whether the services were necessary to the administration of, or beneficial at the time at which the service was rendered toward the completion of, a case under this title; whether the services were performed within a reasonable amount of time commensurate with the complexity, importance, and nature of the problem, issue, or task addressed; and whether the compensation is reasonable based on the customary compensation charged by comparably skilled practitioners in cases other than cases under this title U.S.C. 330(a)(4)(A) provides that the court shall not allow compensation for unnecessary duplication of services; or services that were not reasonably likely to benefit the debtor s estate; or necessary to the administration of the case. 3

4 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 4 of A professional seeking an order authorizing compensation must provide a detailed statement of (1) the services rendered, time expended and expenses incurred, and (2) the amounts requested. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2016(a). 13. The Local Rules of Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the Local Rules ) add further direction regarding the composition of fee applications before the Court. In particular, Local Rule sets forth the specifics and requirements for fee applications filed in this District, which must be met, in addition to complying with the Code and the Fed. R. Bankr. P. applicable to the filing and the contents of fee applications. Any such fee application not in compliance with these requirements will not be considered by the Court, unless a waiver is obtained under Local Rule (h). 14. Local Rule (d) requires that fee applications include activity descriptions which shall be sufficiently detailed to allow the Court to determine whether all of the time, or any portion thereof, is actual, reasonable and necessary. To that end, the Local Rule (d) provides: (i) All activity descriptions shall be divided into general project categories of time; (ii) All motions shall include complete and detailed activity descriptions; (iii) Each activity description shall include a time allotment; (iv) Activities shall be billed in tenths of an hour (six (6) minutes); (v) Each activity description shall include the type of activity (e.g., phone call, research); (vi) Each activity description shall include the subject matter (e.g., exclusivity motion, section 341 meeting); (vii) Activity descriptions shall not be lumped each activity shall have a separate description and a time allotment; (viii) Travel time during which no work is performed shall be separately described and may be billed at no more than 50% of regular hourly rates; 4

5 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 5 of 14 (ix) The activity descriptions shall individually identify all meetings and hearings, each participant, the subject(s) of the meeting or hearing and the participant s role; and (x) Activity descriptions shall be presented chronologically or chronologically within each project category. 15. Professional fees may not be awarded unless and until the applicant shows that there is a benefit to the estate and that the fees are reasonable and necessary. Benefit to the estate and necessity are critical threshold issues before the awarding of any fees or compensation. See Rubner & Kutner, P.C. v. United States Trustee (In re Lederman Enterprises), 997 F.2d 1321, (10 th Cir. 1993) (Court held that the disallowance of fees for services which were not necessary or beneficial to the estate should not be considered a penalty but rather a statutory imperative). To be compensable, the professional s services must have been necessary and beneficial to the estate or its creditors. See In re Engel, 124 F.3d 567, 573 (3d Cir. 1997). 16. The applicant bears the burden of proving an entitlement to fees. See id. at 573; Johnson v. Holiday Express Inc., 488 F.2d 714 (6th Cir. 1974). Bankruptcy courts have an independent duty to review fee applications, regardless of whether any party in interest, including the U. S. Trustee, objects. See In re Busy Beaver Bldg. Centers., Inc., 19 F. 3d 833, 841 (3d Cir. 1994) If an applicant fails to sustain its burden on reasonableness, a court may properly deny the application for compensation. See In re Beverly Mfg. Corp., 841 F.2d 365, 371 (11th Cir. 1988). Similarly, a court may reduce a professional s fees or expenses when they are disproportionate to the benefit to the estate, even if the court already has approved the 1 Retention under 11 U.S.C. 327 and compensation under 11 U.S.C. 330 are separate and distinct steps. This two-step process - i.e., appointment under 327 and then compensation under 330, if and only if, benefit-to-theestate is found - was adopted by Congress to eliminate abuses and detrimental practices attributable to attorney control of bankruptcy cases. In re Engel, 124 F.3d at

6 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 6 of 14 professional s retention under Sections 327 and 328 of the Bankruptcy Code. See In re Taxman Clothing Co., 49 F.3d 310, 316 (7th Cir. 1995); Zolfo, Cooper & Co. v. Sunbeam-Oster Co., Inc., 50 F.3d 253, (3d Cir. 1995) (affirming lower court s denial of improperly documented and inadequately detailed expenses). 18. Applicants must supply sufficient information to enable proper analysis of the services rendered as required by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2016(a), which requires that an entity seeking compensation for services rendered set forth a detailed statement of the services rendered, time expended and expenses incurred to allow the determination of whether the services were actual and necessary. See, e.g., In re Busy Beaver Bldg. Centers., Inc., 19 F. 3d at 845; Matter of Meade Land & Dev. Co., 577 F.2d 858, 859 (3d Cir. 1978) In particular, applications that fail to identify, set forth or itemize certain tasks or services may not be awarded compensation. See In re Poseidon Pools of America, Inc., 180 B.R. 718, (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1995) (Court held that an applicant should sufficiently identify and itemize services, else it would be difficult if not impossible for the Court to determine the reasonableness of each task or service). 20. Section 330 authorizes a bankruptcy court to award retained professionals reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services based on various factors, including the time spent, the rate charged and the reasonableness of the attorney s rate compared to that charged by comparably skilled practitioners in non-bankruptcy cases. In the Third Circuit, courts use the lodestar method to determine the reasonableness of fees under section 330. See In re Busy Beaver Bldg. Centers, Inc., 19 F.3d at 849, n Fed. R. Bankr P. 2016(a) applies to both interim and final fee applications submitted under sections 331 and 330, and, as stated herein, it provides that a professional shall file an application setting forth a detailed statement of (1) the services rendered, time expended and expenses incurred, and (2) the amounts requested... In re Pannebaker Custom Cabinet Corp., 198 B.R. 453, 458 (Bankr. M.D. Pa. 1996). 6

7 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 7 of Calculation of the lodestar is a two-step process. First... The court must determine the reasonable number of hours expended multiplied by the appropriate billing rate. Second, once the appropriate lodestar amount is established, the next step is a determination as to whether or not an enhancement or reduction of the fee is warranted. In re Landmark Distributors, Inc., 195 B.R. 837, 849 (Bankr. D. N.J. 1996). The lodestar may be adjusted to consider the results obtained. See Lindy Bros. Builders v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp., 640 F.2d 102, 118 (3d Cir. 1976); In re American Mortg. & Inv. Services, 158 B.R. 43, (Bankr. D. N.J. 1993). 22. Another factor in the 330 analysis is whether time spent on tasks may be duplicative or excessive. 11 U.S.C. 330(a)(4)(A)(i). The applicant should sufficiently identify and itemize its services so a determination of the reasonableness of each task may be achieved. In re The Bennet Funding Group, Inc., 213 B.R. 234, 244 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1997); In re Poseidon Pools of America, Inc., 180 B.R. at (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1995). 23. Time entries may not be vague. Professionals have the burden of proving the reasonableness of their fee requests; accordingly, they must provide specific and detailed time records. To that end, the U. S. Trustee Guidelines applicable to this case require [t]ime entries for telephone calls, letters, and other communications should give sufficient detail to identify the parties to and the nature of the communication. Time entries for court hearings and conferences should identify the subject of the hearing or conference. See U. S. Trustee Guidelines at (b)(4)(v). 3 3 Instead of embarking on a treasure hunt to determine what services were performed on a specific date, the time entries submitted should allow the Court and a reviewer to determine the legal issues involved, the difficulties of the issues, and the resolution or results obtained. In re Hudson, 364 B.R. 875, 880 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 2007). References to telephone calls that do not make clear who the call was with or the subject matter discussed, preparation of memoranda of law that do not indicate the legal issues involved, communications without a description of the substance of the communications and the recipients of such communications, and the review of 7

8 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 8 of In order to enable the Court to determine whether a professional s time spent on a task is reasonable, time entries must be specific, and the records must clearly identify each discrete task billed. See In re Baker, 374 B.R. 489, 495 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2007) ( The records must be detailed enough to enable a Court to determine whether the attorneys are claiming compensation for hours that are redundant, excessive, or otherwise unnecessary. ); see also In re Bennett Funding Group, 213 B.R. 234, 244 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1997) ( In cases where the time entry is too vague or insufficient to allow for a fair evaluation of the work done and the reasonableness and necessity for such work, the court should disallow compensation for such services. ). Vague entries make a fair evaluation of the work done and the reasonableness and necessity for the work extremely difficult, if not impossible. In re Hudson, 364 B.R. 875, 880 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 2007). 25. According to the U. S. Trustee Guidelines, billing records must clearly identify each discrete task billed, indicate the date the task was performed, the precise amount of time spent (not to be billed in increments greater than one-tenth of an hour), who performed the task, the level of experience, and that person s hourly rate. See U. S. Trustee Guidelines at (b)(4)(v). 26. Moreover, the U. S. Trustee Guidelines provide that [s]ervices should be noted in detail and not combined or lumped together, with each service showing a separate time entry. Id. Recording multiple tasks as one billing entry (typically referred to as block billing or lumping, ) is routinely disallowed as it makes it exceedingly difficult to determine the reasonableness of the time spent on each of the individual tasks performed. See Baker, 374 B.R. documents without providing a description of the document reviewed are all examples of vague time entries that make a fair evaluation of the work done and its reasonableness impossible. See id.; In re CCT Commc ns, Inc., 2010 WL , at *7 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. August 24, 2010) (disallowing time entries referring to telephone calls and s without identifying the subject matter of the call or , referring to preparation of draft letters without identifying the subject matter, and referring to vague description such as work on fee application or attention to Vlahos s request ); In re Fibermark, Inc., 349 B.R. 385, (Bankr. D. Vt. 2006). 8

9 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 9 of 14 at 494 (citations omitted) ( A professional is required to bill each task separately. That way, a Court can scrutinize the reasonableness of the time expended and counsel is not tempted to inflate the actual time spent and group multiple tasks together hoping to camouflage the true length of an individual task. ). As a result of lumping time, the timekeeper fails to sustain [his] burden of providing that [his] fees are reasonable. In re Brous, 370 B.R. 563, 576 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2007). Consequently, courts summarily will disallow time for discrete legal services merged together in a fee application. See, e.g., Baker, 374 B.R. at 496 (deducting 20% from the requested fees for improper block billing). The U. S. Trustee Guidelines permit lumping only where the aggregate time does not exceed a half-hour. Id. Local Rule (d)(iv) and (vii) are more stringent still and do not allow any lumping. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS 27. Skadden s First Interim Application includes a number of impermissibly vague or lumped time entries. Annexed hereto as Exhibits A through C are charts outlining, describing and identifying time entries that are non-compliant and vague for the Interim Period which total $389, Also annexed hereto as Exhibits D through F are charts outlining, describing and identifying time entries that are non-compliant and lumped together for the Interim Period which total $239, As a result of these non-compliant time entries, and absent explanatory information to the contrary, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce the fees for these services by $629, The First Interim Application includes certain time entries in which the time expended and services rendered appear to exceed what is reasonable for the work performed. Annexed hereto as Exhibit G is a chart outlining, describing and identifying the time entries in which an excessive amount of time appears to have been expended in drafting and preparing the 9

10 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 10 of 14 Key Employee Incentive Plan Motion (D. I. 435). These time entries do not include the substantial amount of time expended by other professionals related to the task undertaken. These time entries total $54, Absent further explanation, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce the fees for those services by $54, Additionally, Skadden attorneys appear to have billed an excessive amount of time drafting and preparing the bar date papers: more than $35,000. Exhibit H sets forth a chart outlining and listing the subject time entries. Absent further explanation, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce the fees for those services by $35, Certain of the time entries identify generalized references to team meetings, group meetings, internal strategy teleconferences and working group meetings. However, these time entries are not sufficiently descriptive to permit a meaningful determination whether the professionals involved are seeking compensation for services that may be redundant, excessive, or otherwise necessary. Additionally, these meetings may result in time spent on tasks that may have been duplicative or excessive. When more than one professional is working on the case in the same capacity as another, the likelihood of duplication of effort increases. Professionals representing the same client who each bill separately for identical services should have their compensation reduced to correct for excessive or duplicative hours. Absent satisfactory explanation, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce the request by $13, related to services identified on Exhibit I In the June Monthly Fee Application, there were three (3) time entries for timekeeper Mazza for 2.3 hours totaling $2, in fees attending all-hands update or status meetings with professionals on June 19 th, June 25 th and June 26 th. These intra-office meetings 4 It should be noted that time entries in this Exhibit could also have been included in the Lumped or Vague categories identified and listed above. 10

11 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 11 of 14 appear to have been concerned with internal case management, not associated with services that may have been beneficial to the Debtors estate. Accordingly, the U. S. Trustee requests a reduction for this item of $2, In the June Monthly Fee Application, certain time keepers billed for non-working travel and then also billed for services provided resulting in a billing discrepancy of 1.5 times for travel plus actual services rendered. For example, on June 10, 2013, timekeeper Louis Chiappetta spent 5.7 hours preparing for the first-day hearing and revising first-day pleadings, and another 10.1 hours analyzing vendor issues, holding strategy conferences and other services, while spending another 5.3 hours traveling from Chicago to Atlanta for a total of 21.1 hours. It appears that although the non-working travel was billed at a 50% rate, it was billed on top of the total hours worked effectively resulting in a rate that is 1.5 times the timekeeper s actual hourly rate. There appear to be other instances of this type of billing discrepancy, and the U. S. Trustee seeks as reduction of $5, accordingly. See Exhibit J. 33. Skadden seeks compensation of $26, for the attendance of ten Skadden professionals at the first-day hearings on June 11, The U. S. Trustee s review of these time records indicates that multiple attorneys attended the first-day hearing, some in person and some telephonically. While the U. S. Trustee acknowledges the complexity of the tasks required to represent the Debtor at its first-day hearing, the need for multiple professionals attending this hearing, especially telephonically, is not evident. Therefore, the U. S. Trustee requests that Skadden review its time records to remove charges where more than three professionals attended the first-day hearing. In the absence of such a review and reduction, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court withhold awarding the fees for these services. See Exhibit K. 11

12 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 12 of Likewise, under its project category Committee Meetings Skadden seeks compensation in the amount of $5, for certain telephone calls with Creditors Committee counsel. See Exhibit K. The U. S. Trustee s review of these time records indicates that multiple attorneys participated in these telephone calls on at least two occasions. While the U. S. Trustee acknowledges the need to communicate with Creditors Committee counsel, the need for multiple professionals participating in these telephone calls is not evident. Therefore, the U. S. Trustee requests that Skadden review its time records to remove charges where the participation of the attorneys involved was duplicative. In the absence of such a reduction, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court withhold awarding the fees under this project category in the sum of $5, Additionally, Skadden seeks compensation of $22, for the attendance of seven Skadden professionals at the July 24, 2013 omnibus hearing where the only contested matter was the hearing appears to have been the Debtor s Motion for a Final Order Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Post-Petition Financing and Use of Cash Collateral. (D. I. 97, 409, 410). The Skadden professionals in attendance at this hearing were Anthony Clark, Kenneth S. Ziman, James J. Mazza, Jr., Kristhy M. Peguero, Brandon M. Duncomb, while both Justin Winerman and Jonathan H. Hofer attended telephonically. While the U. S. Trustee again acknowledges the complex nature of the services required to represent the Debtors at this hearing, the need for multiple professionals attending this hearing, especially telephonically, is not evident and does not appear to be warranted. Therefore, the U. S. Trustee requests that Skadden review its time records to remove charges for counsel other than Mr. Clark and Mr. Ziman. Accordingly, in the absence of information to the contrary, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce Skadden s fees for this hearing from $22, to $ $8,

13 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 13 of Skadden also seeks $257, in professional fees for 300 hours related to Environmental Matters in this first interim period. However, the Debtor also retained Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP ( Sheppard Mullin ) as special counsel to advise the Debtor with respect to a variety of significant environmental matters including the effective shutdown of the Debtor s Vernon, California secondary lead-recycling facility and related matters. (D. I. 148, 280). 37. Skadden s time records do not readily reveal whether the environmental matters for which Skadden billed fall within the scope of services Sheppard Mullin was retained to perform. The U.S. Trustee is not asserting that the work Skadden performed in this area was not reasonable and necessary. This is because Skadden s time records do not disclose enough information to justify such an assertion one way or another. As the applicant, however, Skadden has the burden of showing that its fees are reasonable and necessary, and this entails a showing that the services provided were not duplicative of the services other professionals provided or were retained to provide in this case. Absent such a showing, the U. S. Trustee requests that the Court reduce the request by $257, related to environmental services set forth in the First Interim Application. 38. There are computer-aided legal research charges for two Skadden timekeepers that are not listed in the First Interim Application and which services may be for legal research performed on another case but erroneously billed to these cases. These are for timekeepers known as Rockness and Cekovsky in the June Monthly Application and performed on June 25 th and June 26 th totaling $ Absent clarifying information or further explanation, the U. S. Trustee requests that this expense reimbursement be denied. 13

14 Case KJC Doc 1042 Filed 11/07/13 Page 14 of With respect to the August Monthly Application, there are two billings for Westlaw services by Skadden personnel who appear not to have billed any time to these cases during the First Interim Period. Timekeeper Mirisis incurred a $49.50 charge for Westlaw research on August 8 th, and Timekeeper Koulikov incurred a $ charge on August 27 th. Neither individual billed any hours to these cases during the First Interim Period. To the extent these Westlaw charges were in connection with other matters, they should not be billed to these bankruptcy estates, and the First Interim Application should be reduced by $ CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, the U. S. Trustee respectfully submits that the Court enter an order (i) reducing the fees allowed to Skadden by the amounts set forth herein, (ii) directing Skadden to supplement the First Interim Application as set forth herein, (iii) and granting such other relief as is appropriate. Respectfully submitted, ROBERTA A. DEANGELIS UNITED STATES TRUSTEE Dated: November 7, 2013 By: /s/richard L. Schepacarter Richard L. Schepacarter Trial Attorney Benjamin A. Hackman Trial Attorney U. S. Department of Justice Office of the United States Trustee 844 King Street Wilmington, DE Tel: (302) Fax: (302) Richard.Schepacarter@usdoj.gov 14

15 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 37

16 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 2 of 37

17 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 3 of 37

18 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 4 of 37

19 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 5 of 37

20 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 6 of 37

21 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 7 of 37

22 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 8 of 37

23 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 9 of 37

24 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 10 of 37

25 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 11 of 37

26 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 12 of 37

27 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 13 of 37

28 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 14 of 37

29 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 15 of 37

30 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 16 of 37

31 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 17 of 37

32 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 18 of 37

33 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 19 of 37

34 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 20 of 37

35 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 21 of 37

36 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 22 of 37

37 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 23 of 37

38 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 24 of 37

39 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 25 of 37

40 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 26 of 37

41 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 27 of 37

42 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 28 of 37

43 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 29 of 37

44 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 30 of 37

45 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 31 of 37

46 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 32 of 37

47 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 33 of 37

48 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 34 of 37

49 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 35 of 37

50 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 36 of 37

51 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 37 of 37

52 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES, Debtor. Chapter 11 Case No (KJC) Hearing Date: Nov. 14, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. Objections Due: Nov. 7, 2013, at 4:00 p.m. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on November 7, 2013, I caused to be served a copy of THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE S OBJECTION TO THE INTERIM APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION (FIRST) OF SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 10, 2013 TO AUGUST 31, 2013, in the above-entitled action via upon the following persons: Exide Technologies Deerfield Parkway, Building 200, Milton, Georgia Attn: Phillip A. Damaska phillip.damaska@exide.com Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Counsel to the Debtor Four Times Square New York, New York Attn: Kenneth S. Ziman, Esq. and J. Eric Ivester, Esq. ken.ziman@skadden.com eric.ivester@skadden.com Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Counsel to the Debtor One Rodney Square, P.O. Box 636 Wilmington, Delaware Attn: Anthony W. Clark, Esq. anthony.clark@skadden.com Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Counsel to the Debtor 155 N. Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois Attn: James J. Mazza, Jr. james.mazza@skadden.com Davis, Polk & Wardwell LLP Counsel to Agent under DIP Financing 450 Lexington Avenue New York, New York Attn: Damian S. Schaible, Esq. damian.schaible@davispolk.com Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. Counsel to Agent under DIP Financing One Rodney Square 920 North King Street Wilmington, Delaware Attn: Mark D. Collins, Esq. collins@rlf.com Greenberg Traurig, LLP Counsel to Agent for Debtor s Prepetition Secured Lenders 3333 Piedmont Road NE, Suite 2500 Atlanta, Georgia Attn: David B. Kurzweil, Esq. kurzweild@gtlaw.com

53 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 2 of 3 Greenberg Traurig, LLP Counsel to Agent for Debtor s Prepetition Secured Lenders 1007 N. Orange St., Suite 1200 Wilmington, Delaware Attn: Dennis A. Meloro, Esq. melorod@gtlaw.com Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Indenture Trustee for Debtor s Secured Bond Issuances 150 East 42nd Street, 40th Floor New York, New York Attn: James R. Lewis James.R.Lewis@wellsfargo.com Foley & Lardner LLP 321 North Clark Street, Suite 2800 Chicago, Illinois Attn: Mark F. Hebbeln, Esq. mhebbeln@foley.com U.S. Bank National Association Global Corporate Trust Services Indenture Trustee for Debtor s Unsecured Bond Issuances 60 Livingston Ave., EP-MN-WS1D St. Paul, Minnesota Attn: Cindy Woodward cindy.woodward@usbank.com Arent Fox LLP 1675 Broadway New York, New York Attn: Andrew Silfen, Esq. andrew.silfen@arentfox.com Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP Counsel to Unofficial Committee of Senior Secured Noteholders 1285 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York Attn: Alice Belisle Eaton, Esq. aeaton@paulweiss.com Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP Counsel to Unofficial Committee of Senior Secured Noteholders Rodney Square, 1000 King Street Wilmington, Delaware Attn: Pauline K. Morgan, Esq. pmorgan@ycst.com Lowenstein Sandler LLP Counsel to Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 65 Livingston Avenue Roseland, New Jersey Attn: Kenneth A. Rosen, Esq. and Sharon L. Levine, Esq. krosen@lowenstein.com slevine@lowenstein.com Lowenstein Sandler LLP Counsel to Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York Attn: Gerald C. Bender, Esq. gbender@lowenstein.com Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP Counsel to Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 1201 North Market Street, Suite 1600 Wilmington, Delaware Attn: Robert J. Dehney, Esq. rdehney@mnat.com

54 Case KJC Doc Filed 11/07/13 Page 3 of 3 /s/ Benjamin Hackman Benjamin Hackman Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Office of the United States Trustee J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building 844 King Street, Suite 2207, Lockbox 35 Wilmington, DE (302) (phone) (302) (fax) Dated: November 7, 2013