IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION,

et al.1 Debtors. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Chapter 11 Case No. 05-55927 (SWR) (Jointly Administered) (Tax Identification #13-3489233) Honorable Steven W. Rhodes

DEBTORS OBJECTION TO MOTION OF TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION FOR ORDER REQUIRING DEBTORS TO ASSUME OR REJECT CERTAIN EQUIPMENT LEASES The above-captioned debtors (collectively, the Debtors) hereby submit this objection (the Objection) to the motion of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (TMCC) for order requiring the Debtors to assume or reject certain equipment leases [Docket No. 1166] (the Motion). In support thereof, the Debtors respectfully represent as follows:

The Debtors in the jointly administered cases include: Collins & Aikman Corporation; Amco Convertible Fabrics, Inc., Case No. 0555949; Becker Group, LLC (d/b/a/ Collins & Aikman Premier Mold), Case No. 05-55977; Brut Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55957; Collins & Aikman (Gibraltar) Limited, Case No. 05-55989; Collins & Aikman Accessory Mats, Inc. (f/k/a the Akro Corporation), Case No. 05-55952; Collins & Aikman Asset Services, Inc., Case No. 05-55959; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Argentina), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Argentina), Inc.), Case No. 05-55965; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Asia), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Asia), Inc.), Case No. 05-55991; Collins & Aikman Automotive Exteriors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Exteriors, Inc.), Case No. 0555958; Collins & Aikman Automotive Interiors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Interiors, Inc.), Case No. 05-55956; Collins & Aikman Automotive International, Inc., Case No. 05-55980; Collins & Aikman Automotive International Services, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive International Services, Inc.), Case No. 05-55985; Collins & Aikman Automotive Mats, LLC, Case No. 05-55969; Collins & Aikman Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc.), Case No. 05-55978; Collins & Aikman Automotive Services, LLC, Case No. 05-55981; Collins & Aikman Canada Domestic Holding Company, Case No. 05-55930; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (MI), Inc., Case No. 05-55982; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (TN), Inc., Case No. 05-55984; Collins & Aikman Development Company, Case No. 05-55943; Collins & Aikman Europe, Inc., Case No. 05-55971; Collins & Aikman Fabrics, Inc. (d/b/a Joan Automotive Industries, Inc.), Case No. 05-55963; Collins & Aikman Intellimold, Inc. (d/b/a M&C Advanced Processes, Inc.), Case No. 05-55976; Collins & Aikman Interiors, Inc., Case No. 05-55970; Collins & Aikman International Corporation, Case No. 05-55951; Collins & Aikman Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55960; Collins & Aikman Products Co., Case No. 05-55932; Collins & Aikman Properties, Inc., Case No. 05-55964; Comet Acoustics, Inc., Case No. 05-55972; CW Management Corporation, Case No. 0555979; Dura Convertible Systems, Inc., Case No. 05-55942; Gamble Development Company, Case No. 05-55974; JPS Automotive, Inc. (d/b/a PACJ, Inc.), Case No. 05-55935; New Baltimore Holdings, LLC, Case No. 05-55992; Owosso Thermal Forming, LLC, Case No. 05-55946; Southwest Laminates, Inc. (d/b/a Southwest Fabric Laminators Inc.), Case No. 05-55948; Wickes Asset Management, Inc., Case No. 05-55962; and Wickes Manufacturing Company, Case No. 05-55968.

K&E 10804966.4

0W[;%+(

0555927051108000000000002

"6

Introduction 1. TMCC has offered no compelling reason in the Motion that this Court

should require the Debtors to assume or reject TMCCs equipment leases (collectively, the Leases) with the Debtors. In the context of these large and complex cases, the Debtors must evaluate and consider the restructuring of every aspect of their businesses as they move forward with their dual-track process particularly their operations so that they can emerge from chapter 11 as a successful, sustainable and profitable company. Moreover, the Debtors have thousands of executory contracts for which they need (and 11 U.S.C. 365(d)(2) provides) sufficient time to analyze to determine whether assumption or rejection is appropriate. Against this backdrop, TMCCs request is extraordinary. 2. The bases for the relief asserted by TMCC in the Motion are routine

concerns for contract counterparties to a debtor in bankruptcy; these concerns are undoubtedly shared by other contract counterparties and are not sufficient to compel this Court to grant the extraordinary relief requested. In general, TMCCs stated bases for relief are (a) the Debtors alleged failure to remit postpetition payments pursuant to the Stipulated Order Providing for Adequate Protection Payments to Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, dated August 15, 2005 (the Adequate Protection Order),2 and (b) the lack of a guarantee that the Debtors will perform, or have sufficient funds to perform, their postpetition obligations under the Leases. 3. These bases, however, are without merit. In particular, according to the

Debtors books and records, the Debtors believe they are current on all postpetition amounts due

The issue of whether there are any outstanding postpetition amounts under the Leases is not before the Court at this time. The only issue before the Court at this time is whether the Debtors should be required to assume or reject the Leases. To the extent the Motion is also requesting the payment of any outstanding postpetition amounts, the Motion should be denied. Pursuant to the Notice to Bankruptcy Practitioners Regarding Case Management/ Electronic Case Filing dated May 6, 2005, a motion may request one type of relief.

2
K&E 10804966.4

under the Leases.3 In addition, as a result of, among other things, the Debtors successful renegotiation of unprofitable contracts with their major customers and other cost-cutting initiatives, the Debtors project (and have provided detail testimony to support) that they have sufficient resources to fund their operations. Of course, the Debtors are confident they have sufficient funds to make the total monthly lease payment of approximately $60,000 under the Leases. Conversely, TMCC has not provided any evidence that the Debtors cannot perform their obligations under the Leases. Moreover, in the event the Debtors fail to perform any postpetition obligations under the Leases, TMCC has the same protection every other party that performs services for the Debtors has: it is entitled to an administrative expense claim for any benefit it provides the estates. 4. Finally, it should not be lost that should the relief requested be granted, the

Debtors potentially would face an avalanche of similar motions from myriad lessors, thereby deflecting valuable estate resources from the important work of restructuring the Debtors businesses. 5. In short, TMCC has provided this Court with no justification for the relief

it requests. Accordingly, the Motion should be denied. Argument I. Applicable Legal Standards 6. Under section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. 101-1330 (the

Bankruptcy Code), a debtor may assume or reject an executory contract at any time before the confirmation of a plan . . . 11 U.S.C. 365(d)(2). As one court recently has stated:

Though at the time of filing the Motion, certain postpetition amounts may have been outstanding, the Debtors believe that they have since paid all required postpetition amounts.

3
K&E 10804966.4

It has been observed that it is the clear policy of the Bankruptcy Code to provide the debtor with the breathing space following the filing of the bankruptcy petition, continuing until the confirmation of a plan, in which to assume or reject an executory contract. In re Enron Corp., 279 B.R. 695, 702 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2002) (citations omitted). The

provisions of the Bankruptcy Code recognize that [i]t is vitally important to all interested parties that the debtor make a prudent assumption or rejection decision. In re Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp., 54 B.R. 385, 388 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1985) (denying motion to compel assumption or rejection because: (1) the debtors cases were enormous and complex; (2) the determination to assume or reject was complicated and would take significant time; (3) any decision must wait determination of whether debtor would be reorganized or liquidated; and (4) the debtor had continued to perform all of its postpetition obligations) (emphasis in original). 7. A counterparty to an executory contract, however, may request that the

court compel a debtor to assume or reject the contract prior to confirmation. In such an instance, the settled rule is that a debtor has a reasonable time within which to decide. 3 Collier on Bankruptcy 365.04[2][b] (Lawrence P. King rev. 15th ed., 2002); see Matter of McLouth Steel Corp., 20 B.R. 688, (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1982) (holding that a debtor is entitled to a reasonable time to decide whether to assume or reject an executory contract and to determine the impact and result its election will have on the formulation of a plan); In re Republic Technologies Intern., LLC, 267 B.R. 548, 554 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2001) (When a request is made to determine a specified period of time to assume or reject an executory contract, Courts have routinely indicated that the debtor has a reasonable time within which to determine whether adoption or rejection of the executory contract would be beneficial to an effective reorganization.); In re Whitcomb & Keller Mortgage Co, Inc., 715 F.2d 375, 379 (7th Cir. 1983) (same).

4
K&E 10804966.4

8.

What is a reasonable period of time depends upon the facts and

circumstances of the particular case. 3 Collier on Bankruptcy 365.04[2][b]. In determining whether to compel a debtor to assume or reject an executory contract, one court recently considered the following factors: the damage the non-debtor will suffer beyond the compensation available under the Bankruptcy Code; the importance of the contract to the debtors business and reorganization; whether the debtor has had sufficient time to appraise its financial situation and the potential value of its assets in formulating a plan; the complexity of the case; and the number of contracts that the debtor must evaluate.

Enron, 279 B.R. at 702-703 (considering reasonable period of time during which debtor would have to assume or reject certain pipeline transportation agreements) (citations omitted); see also Theatre Holding v. Mauro, 681 F.2d 102, 105-06 (2nd Cir. 1982). 9. However, [a]bove all, the court should interpret reasonable time

consistent with the broad purpose of chapter 11, which is to permit the successful rehabilitation of debtors. In re Dunes Casino Hotel, 63 B.R. 939, 949 (D.N.J. 1986). II. It is Unreasonable to Compel the Debtors to Immediately Assume or Reject the Leases. 10. As set forth below, an analysis of the above-referenced Enron factors as

applied to the circumstances of these cases leads to the conclusion that it is premature and would be detrimental to the Debtors, their estates, and their creditors to require the Debtors to immediately assume or reject the Leases or at any time in the immediate future.

5
K&E 10804966.4

(a)

First Factor: The Damage TMCC Will Suffer Beyond the Compensation Available Under the Bankruptcy Code. 11. In determining what is a reasonable period for the Debtors to be compelled

to assume or reject the Leases, one may consider what damages, if any, TMCC will suffer that will not be paid in the ordinary course or compensated as a prepetition rejection damages claim (if the Leases are rejected) or as an administrative expense claim under section 503 of the Bankruptcy Code. Here, the Debtors currently are using the equipment under the Leases in the ordinary course of their business operations. Such use presents little, if any, physical risk to the equipment going forward as the Debtors will continue to pay postpetition lease payments and remain current under the Leases pending assumption or rejection. Though TMCC alleges in the Motion that the Debtors are not fully and timely performing their postpetition obligations under the Leases, according to the Debtors books and records, the Debtors are current on all postpetition amounts.4 In addition, pursuant to the Leases, the Debtors maintain full coverage insurance for the equipment under the Leases. TMCC, therefore, is adequately protected against any damage to or loss of the equipment. Furthermore, TMCC is a large company, and the Debtors find it hard to believe that TMCC would suffer harm sufficient to compel the Debtors to prematurely assume or reject the Leases, especially given the relatively small total monthly lease payment of approximately $60,000. Moreover, to the extent that TMCC performs postpetition services under the Leases that provide benefit to the Debtors estates, it would be entitled to an administrative expense claim under section 503 of the Bankruptcy Code. Given that the Debtors

The Debtors dispute that there are any outstanding postpetition amounts under the Leases. The Debtors, however, are making a good faith effort to work with TMCC to reconcile the postpetition amounts, if any, currently outstanding under the Leases. In the event any outstanding postpetition amounts exist, the Debtors will pay TMCC such amounts.

6
K&E 10804966.4

are timely paying millions of dollars in other administrative expenses monthly, TMCC hardly would suffer any damages by being provided an administrative claim. (b) Second Factor: The Importance of the Leases to the Debtors Business and Reorganization. 12. Since their bankruptcy filing, the Debtors have been reviewing and

analyzing their business operations, including the review of unexpired leases and executory contracts, to determine whether those leases and contracts are beneficial to the Debtors businesses and estates. The Debtors have been committed to expeditiously reviewing their executory contracts and unexpired leases. The Debtors, however, are party to thousands of executory contracts and unexpired leases, and, thus, the Debtors review of their leases and contracts is still in the early stages. Accordingly, the Debtors have not formed an informed business judgment as to whether to assume or reject most of their leases and contracts, including the Leases. 13. The Debtors decision whether to assume or reject their leases and

contracts is a significant decision in these cases. Not only must the Debtors examine the terms and payments of their leases and contracts to determine whether they should be assumed or rejected, the Debtors also must examine alternative sources of the goods or services provided by such leases and contracts. In addition, the Debtors decision as to whether to assume or reject their leases and contracts is dependent upon the Debtors future business plans, which the Debtors are still formulating with the input and assistance from their advisors, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and the Debtors prepetition and postpetition lenders.

7
K&E 10804966.4

(c)

Third Factor: Whether the Debtor Has Had Sufficient Time to Appraise Their Financial Situation and the Potential Value of Their Assets in Formulating a Plan. 14. Despite the difficulties and complexities inherent with these cases (one of

the largest chapter 11 cases filed this year in the United States), in the months since their bankruptcy filing, the Debtors have made significant progress while maintaining the operations of one of the largest automotive parts suppliers. In particular, the Debtors have successfully addressed their immediate working capital demands, stabilized vendor relationships, enhanced the quality of the management team, renegotiated unprofitable customer contracts and formulated a business plan that incorporates potential revenue increase and cost cutting. 15. As a result of these successful efforts, the Debtors are now in a position to

consider all of their restructuring alternatives and mechanisms to maximize the value of the Debtors estates. Indeed, the Debtors have determined to proceed down dual tracks in these cases: (a) a stand-alone reorganization and (b) the sale of the Debtors operations as a going concern. Until the Debtors fully explore these viable options, the Debtors will not be in a position to make a sound business determination as to which contracts and leases they should reject or assume. Thus, under the current circumstances of these cases, it would make no economic or practical sense to compel the Debtors to assume or reject the Leases. (d) Fourth Factor: The Complexity of the Case. 16. This bankruptcy, which includes 38 administratively consolidated estates,

is clearly a very complex case. The Debtors have approximately 12,000 employees. The Debtors (together with various North American affiliates that did not file for chapter 11) had approximately $2.7 billion in global revenue in 2004; and they maintain dozens of domestic and foreign manufacturing plants. In short, this case is one of the largest cases ever filed in this

8
K&E 10804966.4

District and one of the largest filed so far this year anywhere in the United States. Accordingly, this factor clearly weighs in favor of denying the Motion. (e) Fifth Factor: The Number of Contracts that the Debtors Must Evaluate 17. As discussed above, the Debtors are parties to thousands of contracts and

leases. The Debtors, therefore, require sufficient time to fully and adequately evaluate such contracts and leases in these cases, and this factor again weighs heavily in favor of denying the Motion. Conclusion 18. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Debtors respectfully submit that the

Motion should be denied.

9
K&E 10804966.4

WHEREFORE, the Debtors respectfully request that the Court enter an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, (a) denying the Motion and (b) granting such other and further relief as is just and proper. Dated: November 8, 2005 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP /s/ Marc J. Carmel Richard M. Cieri (NY RC 6062) Citigroup Center 153 East 53rd Street New York, New York 10022 Telephone: (212) 446-4800 Facsimile: (212) 446-4900 -andDavid L. Eaton (IL 3122303) Ray C. Schrock (IL 6257005) Marc J. Carmel (IL 6272032) 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 861-2000 Facsimile: (312) 861-2200 -andCARSON FISCHER, P.L.C. Joseph M. Fischer (P13452) 300 East Maple Road, Third Floor Birmingham, Michigan 48009 Telephone: (248) 644-4840 Facsimile: (248) 644-1832 Co-Counsel for the Debtors

10
K&E 10804966.4

EXHIBIT A

K&E 10804966.4

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION, et al.1 Debtors. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Chapter 11 Case No. 05-55927 (SWR) (Jointly Administered) (Tax Identification #13-3489233) Honorable Steven W. Rhodes

ORDER DENYING MOTION OF TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION REQUIRING DEBTORS TO ASSUME OR REJECT CERTAIN EQUIPMENT LEASES Upon the motion of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation for order requiring the Debtors to assume or reject certain equipment leases [Docket No. 1166] (the Motion), it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is denied in its entirety. Dated: __________________, 2005 ________________________________________ United States Bankruptcy Judge

The Debtors in the jointly administered cases include: Collins & Aikman Corporation; Amco Convertible Fabrics, Inc., Case No. 0555949; Becker Group, LLC (d/b/a/ Collins & Aikman Premier Mold), Case No. 05-55977; Brut Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55957; Collins & Aikman (Gibraltar) Limited, Case No. 05-55989; Collins & Aikman Accessory Mats, Inc. (f/k/a the Akro Corporation), Case No. 05-55952; Collins & Aikman Asset Services, Inc., Case No. 05-55959; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Argentina), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Argentina), Inc.), Case No. 05-55965; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Asia), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Asia), Inc.), Case No. 05-55991; Collins & Aikman Automotive Exteriors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Exteriors, Inc.), Case No. 0555958; Collins & Aikman Automotive Interiors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Interiors, Inc.), Case No. 05-55956; Collins & Aikman Automotive International, Inc., Case No. 05-55980; Collins & Aikman Automotive International Services, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive International Services, Inc.), Case No. 05-55985; Collins & Aikman Automotive Mats, LLC, Case No. 05-55969; Collins & Aikman Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc.), Case No. 05-55978; Collins & Aikman Automotive Services, LLC, Case No. 05-55981; Collins & Aikman Canada Domestic Holding Company, Case No. 05-55930; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (MI), Inc., Case No. 05-55982; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (TN), Inc., Case No. 05-55984; Collins & Aikman Development Company, Case No. 05-55943; Collins & Aikman Europe, Inc., Case No. 05-55971; Collins & Aikman Fabrics, Inc. (d/b/a Joan Automotive Industries, Inc.), Case No. 05-55963; Collins & Aikman Intellimold, Inc. (d/b/a M&C Advanced Processes, Inc.), Case No. 05-55976; Collins & Aikman Interiors, Inc., Case No. 05-55970; Collins & Aikman International Corporation, Case No. 05-55951; Collins & Aikman Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55960; Collins & Aikman Products Co., Case No. 05-55932; Collins & Aikman Properties, Inc., Case No. 05-55964; Comet Acoustics, Inc., Case No. 05-55972; CW Management Corporation, Case No. 0555979; Dura Convertible Systems, Inc., Case No. 05-55942; Gamble Development Company, Case No. 05-55974; JPS Automotive, Inc. (d/b/a PACJ, Inc.), Case No. 05-55935; New Baltimore Holdings, LLC, Case No. 05-55992; Owosso Thermal Forming, LLC, Case No. 05-55946; Southwest Laminates, Inc. (d/b/a Southwest Fabric Laminators Inc.), Case No. 05-55948; Wickes Asset Management, Inc., Case No. 05-55962; and Wickes Manufacturing Company, Case No. 05-55968.

K&E 10804966.4

EXHIBIT A

K&E 10804966.4

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION, et al.1 Debtors. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Chapter 11 Case No. 05-55927 (SWR) (Jointly Administered) (Tax Identification #13-3489233) Honorable Steven W. Rhodes

ORDER DENYING MOTION OF TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION REQUIRING DEBTORS TO ASSUME OR REJECT CERTAIN EQUIPMENT LEASES Upon the motion of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation for order requiring the Debtors to assume or reject certain equipment leases [Docket No. 1166] (the Motion), it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is denied in its entirety. Dated: __________________, 2005 ________________________________________ United States Bankruptcy Judge

The Debtors in the jointly administered cases include: Collins & Aikman Corporation; Amco Convertible Fabrics, Inc., Case No. 0555949; Becker Group, LLC (d/b/a/ Collins & Aikman Premier Mold), Case No. 05-55977; Brut Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55957; Collins & Aikman (Gibraltar) Limited, Case No. 05-55989; Collins & Aikman Accessory Mats, Inc. (f/k/a the Akro Corporation), Case No. 05-55952; Collins & Aikman Asset Services, Inc., Case No. 05-55959; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Argentina), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Argentina), Inc.), Case No. 05-55965; Collins & Aikman Automotive (Asia), Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive (Asia), Inc.), Case No. 05-55991; Collins & Aikman Automotive Exteriors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Exteriors, Inc.), Case No. 0555958; Collins & Aikman Automotive Interiors, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Interiors, Inc.), Case No. 05-55956; Collins & Aikman Automotive International, Inc., Case No. 05-55980; Collins & Aikman Automotive International Services, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive International Services, Inc.), Case No. 05-55985; Collins & Aikman Automotive Mats, LLC, Case No. 05-55969; Collins & Aikman Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc. (f/k/a Textron Automotive Overseas Investment, Inc.), Case No. 05-55978; Collins & Aikman Automotive Services, LLC, Case No. 05-55981; Collins & Aikman Canada Domestic Holding Company, Case No. 05-55930; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (MI), Inc., Case No. 05-55982; Collins & Aikman Carpet & Acoustics (TN), Inc., Case No. 05-55984; Collins & Aikman Development Company, Case No. 05-55943; Collins & Aikman Europe, Inc., Case No. 05-55971; Collins & Aikman Fabrics, Inc. (d/b/a Joan Automotive Industries, Inc.), Case No. 05-55963; Collins & Aikman Intellimold, Inc. (d/b/a M&C Advanced Processes, Inc.), Case No. 05-55976; Collins & Aikman Interiors, Inc., Case No. 05-55970; Collins & Aikman International Corporation, Case No. 05-55951; Collins & Aikman Plastics, Inc., Case No. 05-55960; Collins & Aikman Products Co., Case No. 05-55932; Collins & Aikman Properties, Inc., Case No. 05-55964; Comet Acoustics, Inc., Case No. 05-55972; CW Management Corporation, Case No. 0555979; Dura Convertible Systems, Inc., Case No. 05-55942; Gamble Development Company, Case No. 05-55974; JPS Automotive, Inc. (d/b/a PACJ, Inc.), Case No. 05-55935; New Baltimore Holdings, LLC, Case No. 05-55992; Owosso Thermal Forming, LLC, Case No. 05-55946; Southwest Laminates, Inc. (d/b/a Southwest Fabric Laminators Inc.), Case No. 05-55948; Wickes Asset Management, Inc., Case No. 05-55962; and Wickes Manufacturing Company, Case No. 05-55968.

K&E 10804966.4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marc Carmel, an attorney, certify that on the 8th day of November, 2005, I caused to be served, by e-mail (to parties who have provided a valid e-mail address), facsimile (to parties who have not provided a valid e-mail address) and by overnight delivery (to all parties who have not provided a valid e-mail address or a valid facsimile number), a true and correct copy of the foregoing Debtors Objection to Motion of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation for Order Requiring Debtors to Assume or Reject Certain Leases on the parties on the attached service list.

Dated: November 8, 2005 /s/ Marc J. Carmel Marc J. Carmel

K&E 10810970.1

Served via Electronic Mail

CREDITOR NAME A Freeman Adrian City Hall Alice B Eaton Brendan G Best Bryan Clay Champaign County Collector Chris Kocinski City Of Albemarle City Of Eunice City Of Evart City Of Kitchener Finance Dept City Of Los Angeles City Of Lowell City Of Marshall City Of Muskegon City Of Port Huron City Of Rialto City Of Rochester Hills City Of Salisbury City Of Westland City Of Woonsocket Ri City Treasurer DaimlerChrysler DaimlerChrysler Daniella Saltz Danielle Kemp David H Freedman David Heller David Youngman Earle I Erman Erin M Casey Frank Gorman Gail Perry Gatx Logistics Inc Ge Capital George E Schulman Hal Novikoff Heather Sullivan James A Plemmons Jan Steinle Jim Clough Joe LaFleur Joe Saad John A Harris John Green John J Dawson John S Sawyer Josef Athanas Joseph Delehant Esq Joseph M Fischer Esq K Crumbo K Gottsponer K Schultz Kim Stagg Kimberly Davis Rodriguez Leigh Walzer Levine Fricke Inc Macomb Intermediate School Marc J Carmel Mark Fischer Michael R Paslay Michael Stamer Michigan Department Of Mike Paslay

CREDITOR NOTICE NAME John Fabor

Barb Neal Utilities Department The Mator at City Hall Roger Elkins City Manager Pauline Houston Dept Of Building And Safety Lowell Regional Wastewater Maurice S Evans City Manager Bob Robles Treasurer's Office City Treasurer Kurt A Dawson City Assesor/Treasurer Business License Div Pretreatment Division Tracy Horvarter

Gatx Corporation

Email [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

In re: Collins & Aikman Corp., et al. Case No. 05-55927 (SWR)

Page 1 of 2

Served via Electronic Mail

CREDITOR NAME Ministry Of Finance Corp Tax Branch Missouri Dept Of Revenue Municipalite Du Village De Nick Shah Nina Rosete Paul Hoffman Peter V Pantaleo Phh Canada Inc Philip Dublin Phoenix Contracting Company R Aurand R J Sidman Ralph E McDowell Ray C Schrock Rick Feinstein Ricoh Canada Inc Robert J Diehl Jr Robert Weiss Ronald A Leggett Ronald R Rose Sarah Eagle Sheryl Toby Stark County Treasurer State Of Michigan State Of Michigan

CREDITOR NOTICE NAME 15663507 Lacolle

William Kinley President

Collector Of Revenue

State Of Michigan Stephen E Spence Stephen S LaPlante T Pryce The Corporation Of The Town Thomas Radom Treasurer Of State Tricia Sherick Tyco Capital Inc United Rentals Of Canada Inc Ville De Farnham Voridian Canada Company William C Andrews William G Diehl William J Byrne

Gary D Feigler Treasurer Michigan Dept Of Environmental Quality Environmental Assistance Div Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency Michigan Dept Of Treasury Collection Div Office of Financial Mgmt Cashiers Office US Trustee

Email [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Of Ingersoll Joseph T. Deters

Service de la Tresorerie

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

In re: Collins & Aikman Corp., et al. Case No. 05-55927 (SWR)

Page 2 of 2

Served via Facsimile

(no valid e-mail) CREDITOR NAME Acord Inc American General Finance Bayer Material Sciences BNY Midwest Trust Company BNY Midwest Trust Company Brown Corporation Office of Finance of Los Angeles City Of Battle Creek City Of Longview City Of St Joseph City Of Sterling Heights City Of Stockton Colbond Inc Dayton Bag & Burlap Co Delphi Dow Chemical Co DuPont DuPont Enerflex Solutions LLC Exxon Chemicals Gaston County GE Polymerland Health Alliance Medical Plans Inc Intertex World Resources Trintex Corp Janesville Products Kentucky Revenue Cabinet Lake Erie Products Meridian Magnesium Orlando Corporation Pine River Plastics Inc Progressive Moulded Products Revenue Canada Riverfront Plastic Products Inc Select Industries Corp South Carolina Dept Of Revenue Southco Standard Federal Bank State Of Michigan Tax Administrator Teknor Financial Corporation TG North America Town Of Lincoln Finance Office Unifi Inc Unique Fabricating Inc Valiant Tool & Mold Inc Vari Form Inc Vericorr Packaging fka CorrFlex Packaging Visteon Climate Control CREDITOR NOTICE NAME John Livingston Linda Vesci Mary Callahan Roxane Ellwalleger Mark Ferderber Bankruptcy Auditor Income Tax Division Water Utilities Water Department James P Bulhinger City Treasurer Economic Development Don Brown Jeff Rutter Sharon Van Zeeland David Brasseur Bruce Tobiansky Susan F Herr Todd McCallum Paul Hanson Val Venable Robena Vance Bill Weeks Laura Kelly Lilia Roman FAX 248-852-6074 217-356-5469 412-777-4736 312-827-8542 312-827-8542 616-527-3385 213-368-7076 269-966-3629 903-237-1004 269-983-9875 586-276-4077 209-937-5099 828-665-5005 937-258-0029 248-655-8932 989-638-9852 240-250-0895 302-355-2969 248-430-0134 281-584-7946 704-862-6262 704-992-4933 248-443-0090 770-258-3901 248-625-7442 502-564-3875 630-595-0336 517-663-2714 905-677-1851 810-329-9388 905-760-3371 902-432-6287 734-281-4483 937-233-7640 803-898-5147 610-361-6082 248-816-4352 517-241-8077 401-222-3145 401-725-5160 248-280-2110 401-333-3648 336-316-5422 248-853-8422 519-944-7748 586-755-8988 586-939-4216 734-727-9481

Barb Krzywiecki Dan Thiffault George Tabry Christine Brown Sales & Use Tax Division Lorraine Zinar Daniel Watson Linda King Bruce B Galletly Raymond Soucie

Tom Tekieke General Fax Terry Nardone Adriana Avila

In re: Collins Aikman Corp., et al. Case No. 05-55927 (SWR)

Page 1 of 1

Served via Overnight Mail

(no valid e-mail or fax)

CREDITOR NAME Advanced Composites Inc Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Assoc Receivables Funding Inc Basell USA Inc Basf Corporation Butzel Long PC Canada Customs & Rev Agency Canada Customs & Rev Agency Charter Township Of Plymouth City Of Barberton City Of Barberton City Of Canton City Of Dover City Of Dover City Of Evart Recreation Dept City Of Fullerton City Of Havre De Grace City Of Phoenix City Of Roxboro City Of Williamston City Treasurer Collector Of Revenue Collins & Aikman Corp Dykema Gossett PLLC ER Wagner Manufacturing Fisher Automotive Systems Fisher America Inc Freudenberg Nok Inc Ga Dept Of Revenue Ge Capital Ge Capital Ge Capital Ge Capital Comm Serv Astro Dye Highwoods Forsyth Lp Highwoods Forsyth Lp Hnk Michigan Properties Indiana Department Of Revenue Indiana Dept Of Revenue Industrial Development Board Industrial Leasing Company Industrial Truck Sales & Svc Inmet Division of Multimatic Internal Revenue Service Invista ISP Elastomer Keith Milligan Kilpatrick & Associates PC Latham & Watkins LLP Lear Corp Manpower Meridian Park Ministre Du Revenu Du Quebec Municipality Of Port Hope North Loop Partners Ltd PolyOne Corp Prestige Property Tax Special Princeton Properties Qrs 14 Paying Agent Qrs 14 Paying Agent Inc

CREDITOR NOTICE NAME Rob Morgan Michael S Stamer Philip C Dublin Jim Frick Charlie Burrill Thomas B Radom Attn Receiver General International Tax Service Ohio Income Tax City Building Canton Income Tax Dept Wastewater Labroratory

Mary Ellen Hinckle Collections Office Tax Department Port Huron Police Department Barbara J Walker Jay B Knoll Ronald Rose & Brendan Best Gary Torke William Stiefel Director's Office for Taxpayer Services Division

co Highwoods Properties Llc co Highwoods Properties Llc co Rudolph libbe Properties

of the City of Montgomery

SBSE Insolvency Unit Tim Gorman Richardo Kilpatrick Leonora Baughman David Heller Josef Athanas & Danielle Kemp C Garland Waller

co Beer Wells Real Estate Woody Ban

ADDRESS1 1062 S 4th Ave 590 Madison Ave PO Box 16253 7925 Kingsland Dr 1609 Biddle Ave 100 Bloomfield Hills Pkwy Ste 100 1 5 Notre Ave 2204 Walkley Rd PO Box 8040 576 West Pk Ave 576 West Pk Dr PO Box 9951 484 Middle Rd PO Box 818 200 South Main St 303 W Commonwealth Ave 711 Pennington Ave Phoenix Police Dept PO Box 128 161 E Grand River 100 Mcmorran 201 N Second St 250 Stephenson Hwy 400 Renaissance Center 4611 North 32nd St 1084 Doris Rd 47690 E Anchor Ct PO Box 105499 PO Box 740434 PO Box 640387 PO Box 642444 PO Box 60500 Attn Lease Administration Attn Lease Administration 7255 Crossleigh Court Ste 108 100 N Senate Ave PO Box 7218 PO Box 4660 PO Box 1803 PO Box 1807 35 West Milmot St Box 330500 Stop 15 601 S LA Salle St Ste 310 PO Box 4346 3745 C Us Hwy 80 W Melissa Francis & Michael Hogan Sears Tower Ste 5800 21557 Telegraph Rd 30800 Northwestern Hwy 2707 Meridian Dr 3800 Marly PO Box 117 PO Box 3449 33587 Walker Rd 1025 King St East 678 Princeton Blvd Church St Station 50 Rockefeller Lobby 2

ADDRESS2

620 W Washington St 142

2120 West End Ave Ste 100 3100 Smoketree Ct Ste 600

903 N Opdyke Rd Ste C 233 S Wacker Dr

PO Box 6529

CITY Sidney New York Greenville Raleigh Wyandotte Bloomfield Hills Sudbury Ottawa Plymouth Barberton Barberton Canton Dover Dover Evart Fullerton Havre De Grace Phoenix Roxboro Williamston Port Huron St Charles Troy Detroit Milwaukee Auburn Hills Plymouth Atlanta Atlanta Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Charlotte Nashville Raleigh Toledo Indianapolis Indianapolis Montgomery Grand Rapids Durham Richmond Hill Detroit Chicago Houston Phenix Auburn Hills Chicago Southfield Farmington Hills Greenville Ste Foy Port Hope Longview Avon Lake Cambridge Lowell New York New York

STATE OH NY SC NC MI MI ON ON MI OH OH OH NH NH MI CA MD AZ NC MI MI MO MI MI WI MI MI GA GA PA PA NC TN NC OH IN IN AL MI NC ON MI IL TX AL MI IL MI MI NC QC ON TX OH ON MA NY NY

ZIP 453658977 10022 29606 27613-4203 48192 48304 P3A 5C2 K1A 1B1 48170-4394 44203 44203-2584 44711-9951 03820 03820-0818 49631 92632 21078 85003 27573 48895 48060 63301 48083 48243 53209-6023 48326-2613 48170 30348-5499 30374 15264-0387 15264 28260 37203-5223 27604 43617 46204-2253 46207-7218 36103-4660 49501 27702-1807 L4B 1L7 48232 60605-1725 77210 36870 48326 60606 48034 48334 27834 G1X 4A5 L1A 3V9 75606 44012 N3H 3P5 01851 10249 10020-1605

COUNTRY

Canada Canada

Canada

Canada Canada

Canada

In re: Collins & Aikman Corp., et al. Case No. 05-55927 (SWR)

Page 1 of 2

Served via Overnight Mail

(no valid e-mail or fax)

CREDITOR NAME Railroad Drive Lp Receiver General For Canada Receiver General for Canada Receiver General For Canada Receiver General for Canada Revenue Canada Securities and Exchange Commission Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP State Of Alabama State Of Michigan State Of Michigan State Of Michigan State Of Michigan State of Michigan Stephen E Spence Summit Property Management Inc Tate Boulevard I Llc Tax Collector Tcs Realty Ltd The Town Of Pageland Tom Heck Truck Service Town Of Farmington Town Of Farmville Town Of Gananoque Town Of Old Fort Town Of Pageland Town Of Troy Tr Associates Treasurer City Of Detroit Uniform Color Co United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan Valeo Inc Vespera Lowell Llc Village Of Holmesville Village Of Rantoul W9 Lws Real Estate Limited Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz Wellington Green LLC

CREDITOR NOTICE NAME Canada Customs & Rev Agency Technology Ctr

Midwest Regional Office Peter Pantaleo Erin Casey & Alice Eaton Dept Of Commerce & Nat Res Matthew Rick Asst Attorney General State Of Michigan Mc State Secondary Complex US Trustee First Plaza County Of Fresno

Farmville Downtown Partnership

Fsia Inc Randy Lueth Attn Civil Division Jerry Dittrich Blue Point Capital Bpv Lowell LLC

ADDRESS1 100 Vesper Executive Pk 875 Heron Rd 700 Leigh Capreol 11 Station St 700 Leigh Capreol Ottawa Technology Centre 175 W Jackson Blvd Ste 90 425 Lexington Ave Department Of Revenue PO Box 30004 PO Box 30754 Dept 77833 7150 Harris Dr PO Box 30015 430 W Allegan St 211 W Fort St Ste 700 24901 Northwestern Hwy 302 1985 Blvd Se PO Box 1192 21 Albert St 126 North Pearl St 1306 E Triumph Dr 356 Main St 115 West Church St 30 King St East PO Box 520 PO Box 67 315 North Main St 200 E Big Beaver PO Box 33525 12003 Toepher Rd 211 W Fort St Ste 2001 3000 University Dr 10 Livingston Pl 2nd Fl 205 Millersburg Rd 333 S Tanner 10101 Claude Freeman Dr Ste 200 N 51 W 52nd St 31100 Telegraph Rd Ste 200

ADDRESS2

875 Heron Rd

50 N Ripley St

PO Box 2228

PO Box 67

PO Box 100

CITY Tyngsboro Ottawa Dorval Belleville Dorval Ottawa Chicago New York Montgomery Lansing Lansing Detroit Lansing Lansing Detroit Southfield Hickory Fresno Trenton Pageland Urbana Farmington Farmville Gananoque Old Fort Pageland Troy Troy Detroit Warren Detroit Auburn Hills Greenwichn Holmesville Rantoul Charlotte New York Bingham Farms

STATE MA ON QC ON QC ON IL NY AL MI MI MI MI MI MI MI NC CA ON SC IL NH NC ON NC SC NC MI MI MI MI MI CT OH IL NC NY MI

ZIP 01879-2710 K1A 1B1 H4Y 1G7 K8N 2S3 H4Y 1G7 K1A 9Z9 60604 10017-3954 36104 48909 48909 48277-0833 48909 48918-0001 48226 48075 28602 937151192 K8V 5R1 29728 61802 03835 27828-1621 K7G 2T6 28762 29728 27371 48083 48232 48089-3171 48226 48326-2356 06830 44633 61866 28262-2337 10019 48025

COUNTRY Canada Canada Canada Canada Canada

Canada

Canada

PO Box 113

co Lincoln Harris Llc Hal Novikoff

In re: Collins & Aikman Corp., et al. Case No. 05-55927 (SWR)

Page 2 of 2