Tips for a Successful ZoomGov Court Experience; Electronic Devices in the Courtroom; Guidelines for Valuing and Avoiding Liens in Chapter 13 Cases; Judicial Practice Guide; Judicial Variance Statement; Notice Regarding Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing/Continuing the Automatic Stay; Notic

=== Tips for a Successful ZoomGov Court Experience ===

Tips for a Successful ZoomGov Court Experience 1. Test the video and audio capabilities of your computer or mobile device in advance of the hearing (i.e., at least one day in advance). a. You can do this by clicking on the ZoomGov meeting link posting for the hearing and/or check your video and audio using the ZoomGov app. 2. If you intend to speak at the hearing, please find a quiet place from which to participate. 3. If you are connecting to the hearing using a wireless device, you should situate yourself in a location with a strong wireless signal. 4. Unless and until it is your turn to speak, please mute your audio to minimize background noise. a. If connected to ZoomGov audio by telephone, you can mute or unmute your connection by pressing *6 on your phone. 5. When you first speak—and each time you speak after someone else has spoken—please say your name. This is essential to making a good court record. The only part of the hearing being recorded is the audio. If a transcript is requested, it is sometimes difficult for the transcriber to know who is speaking. 6. If you are participating by video, avoid having a window or bright background behind you. (You may, as a result, appear on video as a shadow.) If you cannot avoid the bright background, try using a desk lamp or other light source to brighten your face. 7. If you are participating by video using a personal computer, you may separately connect to the audio feed by telephone (for improved audio) using the call-in information provided for the hearing. a. If you do this, please connect to the video feed first. In the ZoomGov app, you will be assigned a Participant Code. Use this code to associate your video and audio feeds. Revised 12/15/2022 8. If available, a headset-microphone often provides better sound quality for listening and speaking. 9. Participants and members of the public should at all times remember that although conducted remotely, these hearings are official court proceedings, and individuals should act accordingly. a. If video is enabled, please wear attire consistent with the decorum of court proceedings. b. ZoomGov permits the use of virtual backgrounds to safeguard your privacy. Your background should be professional, consistent with an appearance in court. 10. ZoomGov video participants are permitted to specify a display name. If using video, please specify your complete name to assist the Court in creating a record of the proceedings. Revised 12/15/2022

=== Electronic Devices in the Courtroom ===

OFFICIAL POLICY FOR THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES WITHIN THE COURTROOM OF THE HONORABLE JULIA W. BRAND 1. Electronic devices, such as a smart phone, tablet, laptop computer or a similar functioning device having wireless communications capability may be brought into and used within the courtroom. The courtroom has wireless internet service and the password may be secured from the Courtroom Deputy. Telephone ring tones and other functional sounds produced by devices (including but not limited to “vibrate”) MUST be disabled while in the courtroom. Only quiet keyboards may be used in the courtrooms. 2. No person may use such devices within the courtroom to make or receive telephone calls, or to take photographs or for audio or video recording or transmission (exceptions for Court staff, or with Court approval). 3. Persons may use such devices to take notes, transmit and receive data communications, and access the Internet. However, persons may not use such devices to communicate with counsels, parties or witnesses during ongoing proceedings. 4. Media members may transmit written accounts of the proceeding to a wider audience using various means. These persons may not use these devices for telephone calls, photographs or audio or video recording or transmission. 5. At any time, the Judge may prohibit or further restrict use of such devices by all persons prior to or during a proceeding when necessary to protect the rights of the parties or to assure the orderly conduct of the proceedings. Effective 09/25/14

=== Guidelines for Valuing and Avoiding Liens in Chapter 13 Cases ===

JUDGE JULIA W. BRAND’S GUIDELINES FOR VALUING AND AVOIDING LIENS IN CHAPTER 13 CASES Effective June 1, 2012, all new requests to value and avoid liens in chapter 13 cases must be brought via motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9014. Such motions (commonly referred to as “lien strip motions,” “motions to value,” “Lam motions,”1 etc.) must be made on Local Form 4003-2.4-MOTION, entitled “Debtor's Motion to Avoid Junior Lien on Principal Residence [11 U.S.C. § 506(d)]” (Motion to Avoid Junior Lien). This form may be found on the Court’s website, www.cacb.uscourts.gov, by clicking on “Forms/Rules/General Orders,” then “Local Bankruptcy Rules & Forms,” and scrolling down to F 4003-2.4-MOTION. After June 1, 2012, if a Lam motion is not filed using Local Form 4003-2.4- MOTION, including the proof of service, the motion will not be set for hearing. EVIDENCE As Local Form 4003-2.4-MOTION indicates, a Motion to Avoid a Junior Lien must be supported by admissible evidence regarding the amount and priority of the liens at issue and the value of the property. Evidence must be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. 1. Liens. Without evidence as to the validity and amount of the senior secured loan and the junior secured loan, the requested relief cannot be granted. The debtor's declaration, which contains the debtor’s testimony regarding the liens and loan amounts and introduces the documents into evidence, along with a copy of the deed of trust, a loan statement, proof of claim or other statement from the current lender will establish the amount and validity of the lien. No documents will be considered as evidence unless they are accompanied by a declaration. The court does not consider a credit report listing amounts owed to be admissible evidence of validity and amount; it is hearsay. 2. Value. The debtor may testify through a declaration regarding the value of the residence. The declaration should contain the basis for the testimony, which may include, among other factors, the debtor’s familiarity with the residence, the neighborhood, and recent sales. It is insufficient for the declaration to only state: “I believe that my residence is worth $xxx,xxx.” Please note that the debtor may not rely solely on Internet sources, which are inadmissible hearsay. Therefore, a declaration stating “I believe my residence is worth $xxx,xxx based on the attached report from zillow.com [or cyberhomes.com or any other website]” is not admissible evidence regarding value. While not required, an appraisal can be persuasive evidence of value. To be admissible, the appraisal must be accompanied by a declaration of the 1 Lam v. Thrift Investors (In re Lam), 211 B.R. 36 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997). Effective June 1, 2012 appraiser. A broker’s price opinion will not be accepted as evidence of value. The broker is not qualified as an expert and cannot give expert testimony on the value of the property. Further, to the extent the debtor relies on the broker’s price opinion to establish value in the debtor’s declaration, such opinion is hearsay. SERVICE Use of the proof of service in Local Form 4003-2.4-MOTION is mandatory. The proof of service must be completely filled out to indicate what parties were served, how they were served, and when they were served. Be sure to allow sufficient notice of the hearing date to comply with LBR 9013-1(d) (notice to be served not later than 21 days before the hearing date). If a hearing date is chosen that is less than 21 days after service, the motion will be continued at least 21 additional days to allow for the full notice period. Proper service of the Motion to Avoid Junior Lien – including compliance with Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7004 and Local Bankruptcy Rule 4003-2(c) – is critical. 1. Parties to serve. The chapter 13 trustee, the affected lienholder, and all other parties asserting a lien on the property must be served. 2. Compliance with F.R.B.P. 7004(b)(3). This rule applies to domestic and foreign corporations and provides that service may be made by first-class mail upon “an officer, a managing or general agent, or to any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.” The address for the corporation and its agent, if any, can usually be found on the California Secretary of State website. 3. Compliance with F.R.B.P. 7004(h). Rule 7004(b)(3) generally applies to corporations, although it does not apply if a party is an insured depository institution. Insured depository institutions must be served pursuant to F.R.B.P. 7004(h). Many lienholders are FDIC-insured institutions and must be served in accordance with Rule 7004(h). a. Is the lienholder an FDIC-insured institution? The FDIC website has a feature to search for institutions: http://www2.fdic.gov/idasp/main.asp. This feature will provide an address and list of officers for the institution. Please note that many institutions are subsidiaries of FDIC-insured institutions (for example, Bank of America Home Loans is a subsidiary of Bank of America, N.A.). In these cases, the FDIC-insured parent must be served in accordance with Rule 7004(h). Effective June 1, 2012 b. How to accomplish service in accordance with Rule 7004(h)? Rule 7004(h) requires that service be made by certified mail addressed to an officer of the institution. i. Use Certified Mail. Regular first-class mail, overnight mail or courier, or any other delivery method does not comply with Rule 7004(h); certified mail must be used. ii. Address service to an officer. Many courts have held that addressing service to “Officer of the Institution,” “Chief Executive Officer,” or “President” complies with the rule. The institution’s address can be found on either the FDIC website or the California Secretary of State website. Because the FDIC and California Secretary of State websites are updated regularly, it is helpful to attach a print out of the institution’s address from either website to be included with the motion. If the institution’s address is correct, and it is not possible to locate an officer’s name, the court will not find that the motion was served incorrectly (although as a practical matter, it would be rare that an officer’s name could not be found). ORDER If the court grants a Motion to Avoid Junior Lien, the debtor must submit a proposed order, using Local Form 4003-2.4.ORDER, within seven calendar days electronically via the Lodged Order Upload program (“LOU”) in accordance with the LOU Procedures contained in Section 4 of the Court Manual posted on the court’s website. Use of Local Form 4003-2.4.ORDER is mandatory. Effective June 1, 2012

=== Judicial Practice Guide ===

Judicial Practice Guide: 18 Common Situations Chief Judge Julia W. Brand – August 2025 # 1 Communicating with Judge’s Staff Email: You may communicate with Chief Judge Brand’s chambers by calling (213) 894-6080 (main line); or (213) 894-4843 (Courtroom Deputy). Please note, however, that chambers staff will not provide you with legal advice. Response to Request for a Hearing on Less Than Regular Notice: In order to obtain a hearing on less than 48 hours’ notice or on shortened time, following the procedures set forth in LBRs 9075-1(a) and (b). (Additional information concerning compliance with these rules can be found in the Central Guide at Hearings: Request Hearing on EMERGENCY – Less than 48-hours of Notice |Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court and Hearings: Apply to Set a Hearing on SHORTENED NOTICE | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court.) A list of telephone numbers for Chief Judge Brand’s chambers can be found at TCGSUPP9075-1(a) Judges-Emergency-Motion- Contacts.pdf. # 2 Court Hearings --- Appearances, Check-In, Decorum Unless otherwise directed by the Court, you may choose to appear before Chief Judge Brand either in- person in Courtroom 1375, by phone or by video (through Zoomgov.com). Please refer to the posted tentative rulings at https://ecf-ciao.cacb.uscourts.gov/CiaoPosted/?jid=WB and the Court’s website at the Phone/Video Appearances tab to determine if phone or video appearance (through Zoomgov.com) is permitted for your matter or whether in-person appearance is required. The Zoomgov.com connection information for each hearing will be provided in Chief Judge Brand’s publicly-posted hearing calendar, which may be viewed online at: https://ecf- ciao.cacb.uscourts.gov/CiaoPosted/?jid=WB. If you are appearing by phone or video through Zoomgov.com, you must join 30 minutes prior to the hearing for check-in. If you do not join with sufficient time to be checked in, you may join by phone or audio only (through Zoomgov.com); you will not be permitted to join by video (through Zoomgov.com) unless you have been checked in. Your client or co-counsel have the option to appear by phone if desired, to listen only. The judge will ask for one counsel to speak. If your client’s presence is required, the Court will notify you. # 3 What to Find in a Tentative Ruling Section 3-05 of The Central Guide describes what may be found in a tentative ruling, and where to find the link to tentative rulings for any judge which is also provided here: Hearings: POSTED CALENDARS and TENTATIVE RULINGS: Free Access | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court Chief Judge Brand’s procedures concerning the use of tentative rulings appear on the Court’s website at the Instructions/Procedures tab under the following link: Tentative Ruling Procedures.pdf. Please note that, even if Chief Judge Brand has issued a tentative ruling for a given hearing, unless (1) Chief Judge Brand’s chambers staff has confirmed that no appearance is necessary or (2) the tentative ruling itself states no appearance is necessary or that appearances have been waived, appearances are required. A moving party’s failure to attend the hearing on its motion may result in denial of the motion for failure to prosecute and may result in the issuance of an order to show cause re sanctions. An opposing party who fails to attend the hearing on a motion that it has opposed may be deemed to have withdrawn its opposition to the relief requested in the motion. # 4 Does Chief Judge Brand Follow All the Local Bankruptcy Rules? A list of instances in which Chief Judge Brand employs practices that vary from, or imposes requirements in addition to, the Central District’s Local Rules is posted on Chief Judge Brand’s section of the Court’s website at the Instructions/Procedures tab and may be found here: Judicial Variance Statement.pdf. Judicial Variance Statements are also found at section 3-13 of The Central Guide. VARIANCE: Judicial Variance Statements | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 5 Delivering a Judge’s Copy of a Document that has been filed. Chief Judge Brand waives application of LBR 5005-2(d) (requirement for service of judge’s copies) for all documents, unless otherwise directed by the Court. Please do not serve a Judge’s Copy. If a Judge’s Copy is required, you will be contacted by Chief Judge Brand’s chambers. Section 3-02 of The Central Guide links to the LBRs pertaining to judge’s copies and guidance on how to assemble and deliver a judge’s copy may be found here: Chambers: DELIVER a JUDGE'S COPY | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 6 Schedule a Hearing only on a day allowed All judges in the district have “Self-Calendaring” instructions on their webpage. Chief Judge Brand’s self-calendaring procedures may be found here: Brand, J. | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court. A calendar that reflects the specific days and times that Chief Judge Brand hears particular matters may be found here: JB Self-Calendaring.pdf. Please only use the day and time that is appropriate for the type of matter you wish to schedule. If you are unsure regarding which day, time and date to select, please contact the courtroom deputy, Lydia Gonzalez, for assistance at 213-894-4843. # 7 Does Chief Judge Brand Allow Digital Signatures that are Explained in LBR 9011-1? Section 9011-1 of The Central Guide at Signature Requirements; Types of Signatures Allowed; NEW Software-Generated Signatures | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court explains the Court’s policy regarding software-generated signatures of clients and opposing counsel when a document is filed electronically via CM/ECF. Chief Judge Brand follows the signature procedures set forth in Section 9011-1 of The Central Guide. # 8 “Ex Parte” Motions Sometimes parties use the term “ex parte” when they believe the court should enter an order quickly or hold a hearing right away. “Ex Parte” means “without notice.” It is very rare to obtain a Court order without notice. Nearly all motions require some form of notice. See section 2-05 of The Central Guide at: Hearings: LBR 9013-1(d): REGULAR NOTICE (7, 14, 21, 30 or 42 days of notice) | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court (1) Some motions may be determined without a hearing, See LBR 9013-1(p)-(q) and Section 2-09 of The Central Guide found at: Hearings: LBR 9013-1(p)-(q): NO HEARING UNLESS JUDGE REQUIRES | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court. (2) Some motions can be heard on more than 48 hours – but less than regular notice – if the standard for shortened notice is met. See section 2-06 of The Central Guide. Hearings: LBR 9075-1(b): SHORTENED NOTICE (Fewer Than 21 Days) | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court (3) Other motions can be heard within 48 hours if the standard for an emergency hearing is met. See section 2-07 of The Central Guide. Hearings: LBR 9075-1(a): EMERGENCIES (48 Hours of Notice) | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 9 Stipulations and Motions to Continue a Hearing Unless otherwise instructed by the Court, contacting chambers is not an effective method to obtain a continuance. When all parties agree to continue a hearing, follow LBR 9013-1(m)(2) and LBR 9071- 1(a)(2), which requires that the parties file a stipulation to continue the hearing at least two court days prior to the date schedule for hearing: (1) The parties must state clearly the proposed new date or range of dates for a new hearing, and the reason for the proposed date. (2) The stipulation must contain good cause for not using the original hearing date. (3) The parties must lodge a proposed order. When a party files a motion to continue, Chief Judge Brand follows LBR 9013-1(m)(1), which requires that: (1) The motion must be filed with a notice of motion under LBR 9013-1(p). (2) A motion must include a declaration under penalty of perjury; and (3) The motion must comply with the same standard for a stipulation to continue the hearing. Submitting Exhibits as Evidence to a Motion or in a Trial # 10 In bankruptcy court, evidence is typically provided by written declaration instead of by oral testimony. Exhibits require authentication to be admissible. Testimony in a written declaration, made by a person who has personal knowledge and authority, is required to authenticate the contents of each exhibit. Section 9014(d)-(e) of The Central Guide describes how to submit exhibits as evidence to support a motion, an opposition, or a reply, as required by LBR 9013-1(c). CONTESTED MATTERS: Evidence | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 11 What to Put in An Order Granting a Motion Section 1-15 of The Central Guide provides guidance for lodging an order. See Orders: Judgments: Electronic LODGING: Attorneys: LOU | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court. Additional guidance: (1) Link the order to the proper motion, stipulation, or other request for relief (2) In the caption, indicate the document being ruled on, such as “order granting/denying motion . . . ” (3) Do not include the word, “Proposed” in the caption of the order. (4) Where possible, use the Court’s Lodged Order Upload Program: LOU (Lodged Order Upload) | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court (5) File a notice of lodgment. (Filing the notice and lodging the order are two separate steps. Filing an order with a notice of lodgment attached is not the same thing as lodging the order. Filing an order will only cause the unsigned form of order to appear on the docket. It will not be presented to the judge for review, signature or entry.) # 12 Procedures for Settlements, Including Dismissal of a Dispute Sometimes a dispute gets settled and the moving party decides not to continue pursuing relief. In such case, the movant can file a notice of voluntary dismissal unless a stipulation is needed. See section 9013-1(k) of The Central Guide found at: Motions: Voluntary DISMISSAL or Stipulation to Dismiss | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court. FRBP 9019(a) provides that a trustee may settle a matter by filing a separate motion to approve a compromise. See LBR 9019-1, made effective on 10-21-2024, and Section 9019-1 of The Central Guide found at: Settlement; Compromise of Controversy; Motion Required; Notice on Related Adversary Proceeding | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court. LBR 9019-1 clarifies that: 1. The proceeding to settle or compromise a dispute qualifies as a contested matter. 2. The motion to compromise must be filed on the docket of the main case, even if the compromise will settle part or all of an adversary proceeding. 3. The notice of motion and the motion to compromise must indicate whether the compromise settles all claims against all parties, or whether any parties or claims remain in the dispute. 4. If the compromise is within an adversary proceeding, a notice must also be filed in the adversary proceeding to indicate that a motion to compromise has been filed on the main case docket. # 13 Procedures in Adversary Proceedings Chief Judge Brand’s procedures applicable to adversary proceedings may be found here: Judicial Variance Statement.pdf. Although LBR 7016-1(b)(3) contemplates two possible ways to propose a pretrial order, as set forth in Chief Judge Brand’s Judicial Variance Statement, a pretrial stipulation must be filed on the docket but not separately lodged in LOU. A separate proposed pretrial order must be lodged in LOU. # 14 Procedures in Chapter 11 Cases At the beginning of each chapter 11 case, Chief Judge Brand enters an Order Setting Initial Chapter 11 Status Conference that requires, among other things, service of the order and the filing of the cased status report. At the initial status conference, Chief Judge Brand typically sets deadlines for filing proofs of claim. It is not necessary to file a motion asking Chief Judge Brand to set a bar date. Form of Plans: Unless Chief Judge Brand expressly instructs a plan proponent to use a particular form of plan or disclosure statement, the use of a form plan or disclosure statement is not required. # 15 Procedures in Chapter 13 Cases Chief Judge Brand requires in-person appearance for a hearing on chapter 13 plan confirmation. The chapter 13 confirmation calendar can be found on the Court’s website at the Chapter 13 tab: Chapter 13 Confirmation Hearing Calendar. For a summary of important procedures in chapter 13 cases, please refer to LBR 3015-1. Also, please refer to the Court’s website at the Instructions/Procedures tab, where you will find guidance about valuing or avoiding junior liens: Guidelines for Valuing and Avoiding Liens in Chapter 13.pdf. # 16 What if My Opponent Won’t Cooperate in Legal Discovery? Chief Judge Brand requires parties to comply with requirements of LBR 7026-1(c) when a discovery dispute arises. See section 7026-1(c) of The Central Guide for more explanation. DISCOVERY: Resolve Disputes about Discovery Process | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 17 Participating in the Court’s Loan Modification Management Program Our court has a program for debtors who own real property that is at risk of foreclosure. It is called the "Loan Modification Management Program" because there is a company that manages a portal where documents are submitted and stored. The short term for the program is "LMM Program." The purpose of the program is for lenders and debtors to work together in a supervised manner to hopefully avoid the foreclosure process. A debtor whose case is assigned to Chief Judge Brand may participate in the LMM program. See section 3-10 of The Central Guide for the LMM procedures and LMM forms. Special Tab: LOAN MODIFICATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court # 18 Court Mediation Program vs. Judicial Settlement Conferences The Bankruptcy Court’s Mediation Program was created in coordination with local bar associations to help parties involved in a bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding to resolve their disputes for free or at low cost. The mediation program is available to parties who voluntarily agree to participation in mediation or who are ordered to participate in mediation by a Judge within the Central District of California. The applicable procedures and forms may be found in section 1-14 of The Central Guide: MEDIATION Program: Alternate Dispute Resolution | Central District of California | United States Bankruptcy Court In the right circumstances, the Court may order the parties to a judicial settlement conference.

=== Judicial Variance Statement ===

Judicial Variance Statement for Judge Julia W. Brand Regarding LBR, The Central Guide, and Forms Updated February 17, 2022 Bankruptcy Judge BRAND enforces the Local Bankruptcy Rules, The Central Guide, and use of mandatory court forms. However, here are a few clarifications and exceptions: A. Local Bankruptcy Rule (LBR): 1. LBR 3015-1(q)(6)(A) - Dismissal or Conversion of Case, Distributions after Notice to Chapter 13 Trustee: With respect to any unpaid attorney’s fee or expense asserted under a Rights and Responsibilities Agreement signed by the debtor’s attorney and the debtor or an FRBP 2016(b) statement or any supplemental fee or expense under 11 U.S.C. § 330, the attorney must provide a declaration and a timesheet detailing the amount requested and provide evidence to show that the requested attorneys’ fees and expenses were reasonable, actual, and necessary. 2. LBR 3015-1(v) – Attorneys’ Fees: Judge Brand generally allows the No Look Fee Maximums for additional services, which are found in The Central Guide (https://www.cacb.uscourts.gov/sites/cacb/files/documents/the-central- guide/TCGSupp3015-1%28v%29_Ch13Fees.pdf), but will evaluate each application on a case-by-case basis and may determine that a lesser fee or no fee is appropriate under the specific circumstances. In addition to the “no-look” fee, Judge Brand will generally allow one-half hour of paralegal time for preparing the fee application and obtaining the debtor’s consent, or preparing a detailed declaration concerning attempts to obtain the debtor’s consent. Fee applications with detailed billing records must be filed where there is no court-approved no- look fee, or no fees will be awarded. 3. LBR 5005-2(d) – Judge’s Copy: Judge Brand waives application of LBR 5005- 2(d) (requirement for service of judge’s copies) for all documents, unless otherwise directed by the Court. If a Judge’s Copy is required, you will be contacted by Judge Brand’s chambers. 4. LBR 7016-1(b) – Pretrial Stipulation and Order: A pretrial stipulation must be filed on the docket, but not separately lodged in LOU. A separate proposed pretrial order must be lodged in LOU. 5. LBR 7055-1(b) – Motion for Default Judgment: Motions for default judgment should be set for hearing and should include not only the information and supporting evidence set forth in LBR 7055-1, but also sufficient admissible evidence to establish all the elements of plaintiff’s case in chief. 6. LBR 7056-1(b)(2) - Summary Judgment: The proposed statement of uncontroverted facts and conclusions of law must be served and filed on the docket but should not be lodged in LOU at the same time. The court may direct the prevailing party to lodge proposed findings and conclusions after the hearing on summary judgment or partial summary judgment. A proposed summary judgment should not be lodged in LOU until after the hearing date. 7. LBR 9013-1(j) – Appearance at Hearing: In most cases, Judge Brand issues tentative rulings 24 hours prior to the date scheduled for a hearing. These rulings are generally available via the Court's website and its Tentative Rulings mobile app and appear on the calendars posted outside the courtroom and placed on counsel tables inside the courtroom. Please note, however, that, notwithstanding the issuance of a tentative ruling, unless the tentative ruling itself states that no appearance is necessary, appearances are required. 8. LBR 9020-1(a), (b) – Order to Show Cause by Hearing and Filing Written Explanation Why Party Should Not Be Held in Contempt: Contempt proceedings must be initiated via adversary proceeding. See FRBP 7001(7). LBR 9020-1(c)-(f) otherwise apply. B. The Central Guide: See above. Any other variances are determined on a case-by-case basis. C. Mandatory LBR Forms: 1. LBR 9009-1 refers to LBR forms that are marked “mandatory” or “optional” in the footer of the form. Judge Brand follows the “mandatory” and “optional” distinction by requiring use of all mandatory forms and allowing but not requiring use of “optional” forms. 2. Any variances are determined on a case-by-case basis. Any proposed variances by a party must be clearly shown by “redlining.” D. Optional Forms that Judge Brand Requires or Prohibits: See above. Any other variances are determined on a case-by-case basis E. Other Forms or Format Required Only By Judge Brand: Please see Judge Brand's Procedures (posted at www.cacb.uscourts.gov, “Judges,” “Brand, J.,” “Self-Calendaring,” “Instructions/Procedures,” “Procedures,” “Chapter 13”). Any other variances are determined on a case-by-case basis.

=== Notice Regarding Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing/Continuing the Automatic Stay ===

NOTICE REGARDING MOTION IN INDIVIDUAL CASE FOR ORDER IMPOSING/CONTINUING THE AUTOMATIC STAY Pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rules, a Declaration of Movant can be used as evidence supporting a Motion in Individual Case for Order Imposing/Continuing the Automatic Stay. Please be advised that the Declaration of Movant included on page No. 9 of LBR Form “F 4001-1.IMPOSE.STAY.MOTION” is insufficient to support the aforementioned type of Motion. A motion relying solely on this declaration will be denied by the Court. A separate Declaration of Movant must be included as part of the motion establishing the grounds on which the Movant requests that the automatic stay be imposed or continued (e.g., good faith filing evidenced by substantial change in personal or financial affairs). Effective 07/01/14

=== Notice Regarding Service of Motions for Relief From The Automatic Stay where Relief Is Requested Under 11 U.S.C. § 362(D)(4) ===

NOTICE REGARDING SERVICE OF MOTIONS FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY WHERE RELIEF IS REQUESTED UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(4) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 4001(a)(1) and Local Bankruptcy Rule 4001-1(1), a motion for relief from the automatic stay must be served on the debtor and the debtor’s attorney; the trustee or interim trustee; any codebtors, if relief from the codebtor stay is sought; any other lienholders known to the moving party, scheduled by the debtor, or listed in the public record; and any other party entitled to notice under FRBP 4001, including “such other entities as the court may direct.” Please be advised that Judge Brand requires that a party seeking in rem relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(4) must serve the original borrower(s) on the subject lien, in addition to the parties listed above. If a party seeking § 362(d)(4) relief fails to serve the original borrower(s), the Court will deny the party’s motion. Effective 08/08/16

=== Tentative Ruling Procedures ===

Judge Brand’s Tentative Ruling Procedures In most cases, Judge Brand issues tentative rulings 24 to 48 hours prior to the date scheduled for a hearing. These rulings are generally available through the Court’s webPACER service and on the Court’s website. The tentative rulings also appear on the calendars posted outside the courtroom and placed on counsel tables inside the courtroom. Please note that, notwithstanding the issuance of a tentative ruling, unless (1) Judge Brand’s chambers or calendar clerk has confirmed that no appearance is necessary or (2) the tentative ruling itself states that no appearance is necessary, appearances are required. A moving party’s failure to attend the hearing on its motion will result in denial of the motion for failure to prosecute and may result in the issuance of an order to show cause re sanctions. An opposing party that fails to attend the hearing on a motion that it has opposed will be deemed to have withdrawn its opposition to the relief requested in the motion. Updated 11/4/11

=== Trial Procedures Supplement to Local Bankruptcy Rules for Judge Julia W. Brand ===

TRIAL PROCEDURES SUPPLEMENT TO LOCAL BANKRUPTCY RULES FOR JUDGE JULIA W. BRAND I. TRIAL BRIEFS Unless otherwise ordered by the court, trial briefs are required. Trial briefs must be filed at least seven calendar days before trial. Judge’s copies of the trial briefs should be delivered to Judge Brand’s chambers on the same date. The trial brief should contain a concise statement of the facts of the case and analysis of the relevant legal authorities demonstrating why the party believes it should prevail. II. PRE-TRIAL ORDER Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the parties must prepare and file a written joint pre- trial order pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule (“LBR”) 7016-1(b) through (f). The pre-trial order must contain the statements and information required by LBR 7016-1(b)(2). In conjunction with the pre-trial order, the parties must meet and confer to attempt to stipulate to the authenticity and possible admissibility of the documents that have been exchanged. The court expects the parties to make good faith efforts to resolve all evidentiary issues. III. PRESENTATION OF DIRECT TESTIMONY BY DECLARATION The purpose of this procedure is to facilitate pre-trial preparation and to streamline the adducement of direct testimony in trial so as to reduce trial time without sacrificing due process and a fair trial. A. Except as provided herein, each party must present the direct testimony of all of its witnesses, including expert witnesses, through the declarations of said witnesses, under penalty of perjury, otherwise admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. See, e.g., Lee- Benner v. Gergely (In re Gergely), 110 F.3d 1448, 1452 (9th Cir. 1997); Adair v. Sunwest Bank (In re Adair), 965 F.2d 777, 779-80 (9th Cir. 1992). Each statement of fact or opinion must be separately, sequentially numbered and must contain only matters that are admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. B. All cross-examination, rebuttal, surrebuttal and appropriate impeachment evidence must be given by live testimony. The only oral testimony that may be offered at trial by a party through its own witnesses will be limited to rebuttal testimony or such additional testimony on matters relevant to the outcome of the proceeding as may be specifically requested by the court at the time of trial. C. If a witness refers in the declaration to an exhibit to be admitted into evidence, the exhibit must be identified in the declaration by exhibit number or letter. The exhibit itself need not be attached to the witness’s declaration, but must be included in the exhibit binder or notebook and properly marked for identification. Unless the parties stipulate to the admission of an exhibit, the foundation for admission of exhibits (other than for impeachment or rebuttal purposes) must be established in the declaration. Exhibits referenced in any declaration should be offered into evidence when the declaration is offered into evidence. D. If a party is unable to obtain a declaration of a witness (such as, for example, in the case of a hostile witness), counsel for that party must file (by the applicable deadline for the filing of the witness’ declaration) a declaration stating the name of the witness and why counsel was Page 1 of 3 Effective 05/17/19 unable to obtain the witness’ declaration and a request to have direct testimony by live testimony. The court will rule on the request within two business days. E. A party may present the direct testimony of a witness in the form of a transcript of a deposition of the witness, in which event the party must submit a declaration authenticating the excerpts from the transcript that contain the testimony that the party wishes to introduce (only the portions of the transcript that the party wishes to introduce should be attached to the declaration). F. The declaration of a witness for a party will be admissible at trial, subject to timely objections, only if the declarant is present at trial and subject to cross-examination. IV. EXHIBITS A. Exhibit binders must be delivered to the court, by way of the courtroom deputy clerk, seven calendar days prior to commencement of trial. All exhibits must be marked for identification prior to the commencement of the trial. Exhibit tags may be obtained from the courtroom deputy or the court recorder prior to trial. Each exhibit must be marked for identification at the bottom (right) of the first page of the exhibit. Unless the parties agree upon a unified, joint set of exhibits, the plaintiff’s exhibits must be marked in numerical order, and the defendant’s exhibits must be marked in alphabetical order (e.g., Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1, etc., Defendant’s Exhibit A, etc.). If the parties agree on a unified, joint set of exhibits, the exhibits must be marked in numerical order. B. All exhibits must be assembled in a binder or notebook. Each such binder or notebook must include as its first page an exhibit register on Form B-3024 “Exhibit Register and Notice Re Disposition of Exhibits” available on the court’s website, www.cacb.uscourts.gov under “Other Forms.” C. Please provide one original set (court recorder) and at least four sets of copies (1/each counsel, 1/judge, 1/witness). D. At the commencement of trial, the parties must be prepared to stipulate admission into evidence all exhibits that are admissible for at least one purpose. Bona-fide objections may be reserved, with the issue of admissibility deferred, until the exhibit is offered into evidence. V. DEADLINES FOR SUBMISSION OF DECLARATION, EXHIBITS AND OBJECTIONS A. Plaintiff must submit to opposing counsel all declarations and exhibits comprising the plaintiff’s case in chief not later than thirty calendar days before the trial date. B. Defendant must submit to opposing counsel all declarations and exhibits comprising the defendant’s case, together with any written objections to the admission of any of Plaintiff’s exhibits or to the testimony contained in any of Plaintiff’s witness declarations, not later than twenty-one calendar days before the trial date. C. Plaintiff must submit to opposing counsel any written objections to the admission of any of Defendant’s exhibits or to the testimony contained in any of Defendant’s witness declarations not later than fourteen calendar days before the trial date. D. All witness declarations and exhibits, together with any written objections to the admission of any of the exhibits or to any of the declarations or any portion thereof, must be lodged with the Courtroom Deputy at least seven calendar days before the trial date. E. At trial, each party must also have copies of any exhibits used for impeachment or rebuttal for the opposing party, witnesses and the court. F. Evidentiary objections will be adjudicated at the time a witness declaration or exhibit is offered into evidence. Any evidentiary objections to testimony contained in a written declaration Page 2 of 3 Effective 05/17/19 that is not raised in a written objection filed within the applicable time limit set forth above shall be deemed waived. G. NO OTHER DECLARATIONS WILL BE ALLOWED. The only additional evidence that a party may offer at trial is rebuttal evidence. If the court concludes that testimony that a party seeks to offer should more accurately be characterized as direct testimony that as rebuttal evidence, that testimony will be excluded or, if already provided, such testimony will be stricken, if it was not set forth in a timely-filed declaration submitted by such party. VI. EXCERPTS FROM DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS A. Deposition Transcripts. Each party intending to offer any evidence by way of deposition testimony pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 32, other than for impeachment or rebuttal, must lodge with the clerk the original deposition transcript, together with a copy of the transcript or pages from the transcript to be offered, marked to reflect the portions to be offered, pursuant to LBR 7030-1(b) not later than the applicable deadline for submission of declarations, exhibits and objections set forth in Section V. B. Other Discovery Documents. Excerpts from interrogatories, requests for admissions, or other discovery documents to be offered at trial, other than those to be used for impeachment or rebuttal, must be filed pursuant to LBR 7026-2(c) not later than the applicable deadline for submission of declarations, exhibits and objections set forth in Section V. VII. CONTINUANCE/POSTPONEMENT OF TRIAL DATE Trials will be commenced promptly at the scheduled date and time. Trial dates are not continued or vacated absent good cause, on noticed motion, supported by competent evidence. Page 3 of 3 Effective 05/17/19

=== 06/24/2026 ===

Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:00:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney 1 2 3 4 5 2611492 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 APARICIO, ANDREW S CTD _________ PFDate 2/18/2026 BarDate 4/29/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 448.50 E JAY GOTFREDSON 2613355 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 ARIZMENDI, MELCHOR CTD _________ PFDate 4/7/2026 BarDate 6/16/2026 CL5 % 2.00 PP 361.00 JAIME A. CUEVAS, JR. 2612317 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 BABER, DEANNA LYNN CTD _________ PFDate 3/11/2026 BarDate 5/20/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 200.00 KEVIN T. SIMON 2613479 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 BOOTH, TERENCE MAURICE CTD _________ PFDate 4/10/2026 BarDate 6/22/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 2,912.10 KEVIN TANG 2611961 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 BRAVO, JOVANI BILFREDO CTD _________ PFDate 3/2/2026 BarDate 5/11/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 507.00 KEVIN T. SIMON 1 2 3 4 5 Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:00:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney 6 7 8 9 2613538 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 DOZA, JAZMIN ISELA DOZA, TONY CTD _________ PFDate 4/13/2026 BarDate 6/22/2026 CL5 % 7.00 PP 365.00 DAVID P. FARRELL 2611992 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 EDWARDS, SCOTT THOMAS CTD _________ PFDate 3/3/2026 BarDate 5/12/2026 CL5 % 9.30 PP 4,369.00 PETER M. LIVELY 2612374 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 FARHI, FAISSEL VINCENT CTD _________ PFDate 3/12/2026 BarDate 5/21/2026 CL5 % 27.00 PP 500.00 KEVIN T. SIMON 2613440 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 HARBOR, SALLIE LORRAINE CTD _________ 6 7 8 9 PFDate 4/9/2026 BarDate 6/18/2026 CL5 % 18.00 PP 1,640.00 RAMIRO FLORES MUNOZ 2613802 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 10 JIMENEZ, JONATHAN CTD _________ 10 PFDate 4/20/2026 BarDate 6/29/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 1,932.00 JAIME A. CUEVAS, JR. Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:00:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney 2613545 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 11 KIM, JASON JONGHA CTD _________ PFDate 4/13/2026 BarDate 6/22/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 2,240.00 RABIN J. POURNAZARIAN 2612810 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 12 LOPEZ, KEVIN DREW CTD _________ LOPEZ, CHRISTINE ANN PFDate 3/25/2026 BarDate 6/3/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 1,175.00 HALE ANDREW ANTICO 2613745 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 13 MENDEZ, JUDITH CTD _________ PFDate 4/17/2026 BarDate 6/26/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 250.00 IN PRO PER 2613290 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 14 MENDOZA, JOSE LUIS CTD _________ PFDate 4/6/2026 BarDate 6/15/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 0.00 IN PRO PER 2613796 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 15 PINEDA, JOSE JESUS CTD _________ PFDate 4/20/2026 BarDate 6/29/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 810.00 STEPHEN L. BURTON 11 12 13 14 15 Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:00:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney 2612861 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 16 PORTER, LOLINA MORAN CTD _________ PORTER, BRETT MARTIN PFDate 3/26/2026 BarDate 6/4/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 0.00 IN PRO PER 2613463 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 17 RAMIREZ, ANNABEL CTD _________ PFDate 4/10/2026 BarDate 6/22/2026 CL5 % 1.00 PP 2,452.00 JAIME A. CUEVAS, JR. 2613436 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 18 RAYA, ARLETTE CTD _________ PFDate 4/9/2026 BarDate 6/18/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 1,453.00 MATTHEW D. RESNIK 2613015 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 19 RUSTH, GARY STEVEN CTD _________ PFDate 3/30/2026 BarDate 6/8/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 884.00 RABIN J. POURNAZARIAN 2613662 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 20 VELASQUEZ DE SANTANA, SANTOS DELFINA CTD _________ PFDate 4/15/2026 BarDate 6/24/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 900.00 TYSON TAKEUCHI 16 17 18 19 20 Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:01:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney CM 2611561 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 100 FIGUEROA, GERARDO MANUEL CTD _________ 100 FIGUEROA, BEATRICE ELIZABETH PFDate 2/20/2026 BarDate 5/1/2026 CL5 % 64.00 PP 452.00 DEVIN SAWDAYI CM 2611767 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 101 GRAHAM, RAY EARL CTD _________ 101 GRAHAM, VICKI KAY PFDate 2/26/2026 BarDate 5/7/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 680.00 JULIE J. VILLALOBOS CM 2610049 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 102 HAMER, WILLIE DAVID CTD _________ 102 HAMER, EARNESTINE DORIANN PFDate 1/5/2026 BarDate 3/16/2026 CL5 % 1.00 PP 2,685.00 DAVID H. CHUNG CM 2521000 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 103 HERRIN, HUGH LEWIS, JR. CTD _________ 103 PFDate 12/8/2025 BarDate 2/17/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 947.55 KEVIN TANG CM 2610204 WB 104 JARREAU, RUSTY CNFD DSMD 180 349 CTD _________ 104 PFDate 1/9/2026 BarDate 3/20/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 1,667.00 IN PRO PER Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:01:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney CM 2520537 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 105 MARGARYAN, SERGEY CTD _________ 105 PFDate 11/25/2025 BarDate 2/3/2026 CL5 % 10.00 PP 2,103.00 ANITA KHACHIKYAN CM 2610981 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 106 MOLINA, FRANCISCO ANTONIO CTD _________ 106 PFDate 2/2/2026 BarDate 4/13/2026 CL5 % 2.00 PP 1,550.00 TYSON TAKEUCHI CM 2612387 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 107 MORALES, MARIO FRANCISCO CTD _________ 107 MORALES, ISELA PFDate 3/13/2026 BarDate 5/22/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 3,653.00 BARRY E. BOROWITZ CM 2610055 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 108 NESBITT, STEPHEN CHRISTOPHER JR CTD _________ 108 PFDate 1/5/2026 BarDate 3/16/2026 CL5 % 35.00 PP 1,930.00 RAJ T. WADHWANI CM 2611602 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 109 PICKETT, LOUIS JR CTD _________ 109 PICKETT, CHRISTINA BLENDA PFDate 2/20/2026 BarDate 5/1/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 3,239.00 SUNDEE M. TEEPLE Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:01:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney CM 2610970 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 110 POWELL, ANDREW JOSHUA CTD _________ 110 PFDate 2/2/2026 BarDate 4/13/2026 CL5 % 40.00 PP 1,817.45 RICHARD A. LOA CM 2611395 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 111 REYNOLDS, ROSE CTD _________ 111 PFDate 2/16/2026 BarDate 4/27/2026 CL5 % 10.00 PP 545.98 JOSEPH L. PITTERA CM 2611874 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 112 ROLON, ROSA ELIDA CTD _________ 112 PFDate 2/27/2026 BarDate 5/8/2026 CL5 % 1.00 PP 225.00 KEVIN T. SIMON CM 2517383 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 113 SERRATO, JOSEPH CTD _________ 113 SERRATO, ALENA PFDate 8/25/2025 BarDate 11/3/2025 CL5 % 100.00 PP 4,282.00 JAIME A. CUEVAS, JR. CM 2611814 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 114 THEROUX, JARED MICHAEL CTD _________ 114 PFDate 2/26/2026 BarDate 5/7/2026 CL5 % 100.00 PP 1,019.10 D. JUSTIN HARELIK Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 10:01:00 AM Case Name Time Attorney CM 2612278 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 115 VASQUEZ, ANTHONY MARCUS CTD _________ 115 VASQUEZ, CELINE ANGELIQUE PFDate 3/11/2026 BarDate 5/20/2026 CL5 % 63.00 PP 1,085.00 JULIE J. VILLALOBOS Chapter 13 Calendar Confirmation Hearing Calendar for 6/24/2026 Los Angeles Division Nancy Curry, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Judge: Hon. Julia W. Brand Time 1:30:00 PM Case Name Time Attorney CM 2610038 WB CNFD DSMD 180 349 16 VALLEJO, BEISA RAMULIC CTD _________ 16 PFDate 1/4/2026 BarDate 3/16/2026 CL5 % 0.00 PP 119.45 RANDY CHANG

=== Telephonic Appearance Procedures ===

Judge Brand’s Procedures Regarding Phone/Video Appearances and Requests for Priority and Second Call Judge Brand holds hearings in person. Parties appearing in person must comply with all applicable guidelines of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California regarding social distancing, use of face masks, etc., which may be in effect at the time of the hearing. Phone/Video Appearances Phone/video appearances before Judge Julia W. Brand in Courtroom 1375 are generally allowed without prior approval. Parties may file an application to appear via Zoom for Government (“ZoomGov”) on in person matters for good cause shown. No phone/video appearances are allowed on the following types of matters: 1. Sale Motion 2. Cash Collateral Motion 3. Motion for Post-Petition Financing 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Chapter 11 Plan Confirmation 6. Trials and Other Evidentiary Hearings 7. Chapter 13 Plan Confirmation 8. Motion to Dismiss Adversary 9. Motion for Summary Judgment Parties may appear via phone/video for hearings remotely using the services of ZoomGov, which permits remote participation by video or by telephone. Hearing participants and members of the public may view and listen to hearings before Judge Brand using ZoomGov free of charge. Video and audio connection information for each hearing will be provided on Judge Brand’s publicly posted hearing calendar, which can be viewed online at: http://ecf-ciao.cacb.uscourts.gov/CiaoPosted and going to “Select Judge” Julia W. Brand to see the Court’s Tentative Rulings Viewing Calendar. Individuals may appear by ZoomGov video and audio using a personal computer (equipped with camera, microphone and speaker), or a handheld mobile device (such as an iPhone). Individuals may participate by ZoomGov audio only using a telephone (standard telephone charges may apply). Neither a Zoom nor a ZoomGov account are necessary to participate and no pre-registration is required. Unless otherwise ordered by Judge Brand, no party or witness may appear remotely for any trial or evidentiary hearing. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND THE PRESS MAY ONLY CONNECT TO THE ZOOM AUDIO FEED, AND ONLY BY TELEPHONE. ACCESS TO THE VIDEO FEED BY THESE INDIVIDUALS IS PROHIBITED. IN THE CASE OF A TRIAL OR EVIDENTIARY HEARING, NO AUDIO ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED. HOWEVER, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND THE PRESS MAY OBSERVE SUCH PROCEEDINGS IN PERSON. ALL PERSONS (OTHER THAN AUTHORIZED COURT STAFF) ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED FROM MAKING ANY AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDING OF COURT PROCEEDINGS, BY ANY MEANS. VIOLATION OF THIS PROHIBITION MAY RESULT IN THE IMPOSITION OF MONETARY AND NON-MONETARY SANCTIONS. Please read “Tips for a Successful ZoomGov Court Experience” posted on Judge Brand’s section of the Court’s website. If you appear by video, you must have a professional background. If you intend to speak at the hearing, please find a quiet place from which to participate. All participants (whether attending in person or remotely) must observe the formalities of the courtroom, exercise civility, and otherwise conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the dignity of the Court. This includes appropriate courtroom attire for those participants appearing in person or by video. Individuals choosing to appear via phone/video do so at their own risk. Hearings generally will not be rescheduled due to missed connections. Furthermore, in deciding to appear via phone/video, counsel is agreeing to waive any prejudice attributable to quality deficiencies or irregularities of the record that may result. Please be advised that poor reception will cause counsel’s appearance to be disconnected. Repeated poor connections may cause counsel to be barred from future phone/video appearances. If an individual fails to respond to the call of the matter on calendar, the Court may pass the matter or may treat the failure to respond as a failure to appear. Before appearing via phone/video, please check Judge Brand’s calendar and review any tentative rulings which can be found on webPACER. Requests for Priority and Second Call The attorney cannot request second call for more than 5 matters on a relief from stay or chapter 13 confirmation calendar. When the attorney requests priority or second call, a reason must be given for the judge to consider the request. If no reason is given, then the request for priority or second call will be denied. Revised 10/13/2023

=== Appointed October 24, 2011 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ===

N E W S R E L E A S E October 6, 2011 Contact: David Madden, (415) 355-8800 New Bankruptcy Judge Appointed to Central District of California SAN FRANCISCO — Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit announced today the appointment of Los Angeles attorney Julie Wagner Brand to serve as a judge of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. Ms. Brand, 52, who will maintain chambers in Los Angeles, is scheduled to take her oath of office on October 24, 2011. She will fill a judgeship being vacated by retiring Bankruptcy Judge Geraldine Mund, who has been serving in a recalled capacity since February 10, 2011. Ms. Brand has practiced bankruptcy law in Los Angeles for more than 20 years. Since October 2010, she has been a shareholder in the law firm of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Shreck LLP, assisting in developing the firm’s bankruptcy practice in the areas of natural resources, energy and public debt restructuring. Prior to that, she was of counsel for 11 months to Danning Gill Diamond & Kollitz LLP, where she represented debtors, creditors and estate representatives in Chapters 7 and 11 bankruptcy filings. From 2007 to 2009, Ms. Brand was a partner in the law firm of Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor LLP, where she served as bankruptcy group chair and worked on corporate and bankruptcy matters. From 1991 to 2007, she was a partner at the law firm of Katten Muchin Rosenmann LLP, representing secured creditors and debtors, and serving on the firm’s finance and reorganization department and on its professional responsibility committee. Prior to working at Katten, Ms. Brand was an associate at Gendel Raskoff Shapiro & Quittner and Bolton Dunn & Moore. Ms. Brand received her B.A. from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1981. She received her J.D. in 1985 from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, where she served as editor of the Computer Law Journal and received the American Jurisprudence Award for Labor Law. – more – Throughout her career, Ms. Brand has volunteered her time on behalf of her community. She served on an advisory committee to the Los Angeles Center for Enriched Studies and as a board member of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. She is the former Network Chair and current Communication Chair for the Southern California Chapter of the International Women’s Insolvency and Restructuring Confederation. Her volunteer service also includes mentoring USC law students; pro bono representation of indigent immigrant children in immigration proceedings; and serving as a panelist for educational programs focusing on issues related to bankruptcy law. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California is authorized 24 bankruptcy judges. The court is one of the nation’s busiest, reporting 138,585 filings in fiscal year 2010, up 42.2 percent from the prior year. Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have statutory responsibility for selecting and appointing bankruptcy judges in the nine western states that comprise the Ninth Circuit. The court uses a comprehensive merit selection process for the initial appointment and for reappointments. Bankruptcy judges serve a 14-year, renewable term, at a salary of $160,080, and handle all bankruptcy-related matters under the Bankruptcy Code. # # #

=== Appointed to the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, 2016 ===

N E W S R E L E A S E July 26, 2016 Contact: David Madden, (415) 355-8800 California Judges Receive Appointments to Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel SAN FRANCISCO – Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today announced the appointments of Bankruptcy Judges William J. Lafferty, III, and Julia W. Brand, to seven-year terms on the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, or BAP, which resolves appeals arising out of bankruptcy court decisions in the western states. Judge Lafferty is one of nine judges sitting on the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California, which handled 11,471 cases in calendar year 2015. His appointment to the BAP is effective August 1, 2016. Judge Lafferty, 62, has been a bankruptcy judge in the Northern District since 2011. Prior to his appointment to the bench, he had been an attorney with the San Francisco law firm of Howard Rice since 1987. He became director and member of the firm’s Bankruptcy and Reorganization Practice Group in 1993. Judge Lafferty received his B.A. in 1978 from the University of California at Berkeley, where he graduated with honors and his J.D. in 1985 from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where he was a member of the Constitutional Law Quarterly. Following law school, he clerked for Bankruptcy Judge Thomas E. Carlson of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California from 1985 to 1987. Judge Brand is one of 27 bankruptcy judges sitting on the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, which handled 46,523 cases in calendar year 2015. Her appointment to the BAP is effective December 1, 2016. Judge Brand, 57, has been a bankruptcy judge in the Central District since, 2011. Prior to her appointment to the bench, Judge Brand had practiced bankruptcy law in Los Angeles for more – more – than 20 years. She had been a shareholder in the law firm of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Shreck LLP from 2010 to 2011. Prior to that, she was of counsel for 11 months to Danning Gill Diamond & Kollitz LLP. From 2007 to 2009, Judge Brand was a partner in the law firm of Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor and a partner at the law firm of Katten Muchin Rosenmann LLP from 1991 to 2007. Prior to working at Katten, Judge Brand was an associate at Gendel Raskoff Shapiro & Quittner and Bolton Dunn & Moore. Judge Brand received her B.A. from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1981 and her J.D. in 1985 from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, where she served as editor of the Computer Law Journal and received the American Jurisprudence Award for Labor Law. The BAP is based in the Richard H. Chambers U.S. Court of Appeals Building in Pasadena, California. Historically, the BAP has handled between 49 percent and 60 percent of all bankruptcy appeals originating out of bankruptcy courts throughout the Ninth Circuit (district courts hear the remainder). The BAP was established in 1979 by the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit as an alternative forum for hearing bankruptcy appeals. Since then, it has disposed of more than 15,000 cases, including more than 5,000 decided on the merits. New bankruptcy appeals filed numbered 782 in fiscal year 2015. BAP judges serve a term of seven years and are eligible for a 3-year extension. Other bankruptcy judges from around the circuit also serve on appellate panels on a pro tem basis. The Ninth Circuit was the first federal circuit to establish a bankruptcy appellate panel. Other circuits with bankruptcy appellate panels are the First, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth circuits. For more information, visit: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/bap/. The U.S. Courts for the Ninth Circuit consists of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the federal district and bankruptcy courts in 15 judicial districts serving nine western states and two Pacific Island jurisdictions. # # #

=== Appointed Chief Judge, Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, 2026-2029 ===

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 March 10, 2025 March 10, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN RE THE DESIGNATION OF CHIEF BANKRUPTCY JUDGE JULIA W. BRAND ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE 25-068 WHEREAS, on March 5, 2025, the Court voted to designate the Honorable Julia W. Brand as the Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California for the 2026–2029 term pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 154(b); IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Bankruptcy Judge Julia W. Brand is designated as Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California for a term of four years commencing on January 1, 2026. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: March 10, 2025 ________________________________________ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

=== Designation of Chief Bankruptcy Judge Julia W. Brand ===

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 June 13, 2025 June 13, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN RE THE DESIGNATION OF CHIEF BANKRUPTCY JUDGE JULIA W. BRAND ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE 25-108 (Amending Order of the Chief Judge 25-068) WHEREAS, on March 5, 2025, the Court voted to designate the Honorable Julia W. Brand as the Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California for the January 1, 2026–December 31, 2029 term pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 154(b); WHEREAS, the Honorable Theodor C. Albert, who had been designated to serve as the Chief Bankruptcy Judge through 2025, passed away on May 5, 2025; WHEREAS, upon the passing of Chief Bankruptcy Judge Albert, Bankruptcy Judge Brand was designated to serve as acting Chief Bankruptcy Judge by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California; and WHEREAS, on June 12, 2025, the Court voted to designate Bankruptcy Judge Brand as the Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California for the remainder of 2025 in addition to her 2026–2029 term pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 154(b); // // 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Bankruptcy Judge Brand is designated to serve as Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California for the remainder of 2025 in addition to her 2026–2029 term. DATED: June 13, 2025 ________________________________________ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

=== Reappointed October 24, 2025 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Current term expires October 24, 2039) ===

N E W S R E L E A S E October 14, 2025 Contact: Katherine Rodriguez [email protected] Ninth Circuit Reappoints Bankruptcy Judges in Central District of California SAN FRANCISCO — Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit have reappointed Chief U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Julia W. Brand and U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Neil W. Bason, both from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, to their second 14-year terms, both effective October 24. Judge Brand was appointed a bankruptcy judge to the Central District bankruptcy bench on Oct. 24, 2011. The Ninth Circuit later appointed her to the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for a seven-year term commencing on Dec. 1, 2016, and for an additional three-year term in 2023. Judge Brand became chief judge of the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel in May 2025 and chief judge of her court in June 2025. Prior to her appointment, Judge Brand was in private practice for more than 20 years in Los Angeles, where she was a shareholder in the law firm of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Shreck LLP from 2010 to 2011. Before that, she was of counsel for 11 months at Danning Gill Diamond & Kollitz LLP; a partner at Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor LLP from 2007 to 2009; an associate and then a partner at Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP from 1991 to 2007; and an associate at Gendel Raskoff Shapiro & Quittner, and at Bolton Dunn & Moore. Judge Brand received her B.A. from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1981 and her J.D. in 1985 from the University of Southern California, Gould School of Law, where she served as editor of the Computer Law Journal and received the American Jurisprudence Award for Labor Law. Judge Brand maintains chambers in Los Angeles. Judge Bason was also appointed a bankruptcy judge to the Central District bankruptcy bench on Oct. 24, 2011. Before his appointment to the bench, Judge Bason was special counsel at Duane Morris LLP in Los Angeles from 2009 to 2011 and was special counsel at Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin, P.C., from 2008 to 2009. Judge Bason clerked for U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali of the Northern District of California from 2000 to 2008. Judge Bason was an associate for the former law firm of Hovis, Smith, Stewart, Lipscomb & Cross, LLP, 1996 to 1999, and a contract attorney for various law firms from 1993 to 1996. −more− Page 2 of 2 Judge Bason graduated with a B.A. from Johns Hopkins University in 1984. His undergraduate studies included attending the University of London from 1982 to 1983. He received his J.D. in 1988 from Boston University, School of Law, where he graduated magna cum laude and was a note editor for the Boston University Law Review. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, the largest bankruptcy court in the nation, reported 25,911 bankruptcy filings in calendar year 2024. The court is authorized 21 judgeships. Bankruptcy judges serve a 14-year renewable term and handle all bankruptcy-related matters under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have statutory responsibility for selecting and appointing bankruptcy judges in the nine western states that comprise the Ninth Circuit. The court uses a comprehensive merit selection process for the initial appointment. For reappointments, the court conducts a performance review and considers public comment evaluations. # # #