Claims and the Genesis and Multicare Senior Subordinated Note Claims (the “502(j) Motion”); and (3) granting the Reorganized Debtors’ Cross-Motion For Sanctions, as codified in the March 2, 2006 Order, are AFFIRMED. 1 . The Bankruptcy Court’s oral rulings were subsequently entered in an Order dated ature. 2 . Mellon joins in the Reorganized Debtors' Answering Brief to the extent that it addresses the issues of the pre-final decree equity committee and sanctions. 3 . In their Cross-Motion For Sanctions, the Reorganized Debtors specifically referenced both 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and the Bankruptcy Court's inherent authority to impose sanctions including cases citing to both Section 105 of the Bankruptcy Code and 28 U.S.C. § 1651. (D.I. 27 at RD199-RD200.) See e.g., Fellheimer, 57 F.3d at 1225 (<HOLDING>). 4 . In addition to the January 19, 2006
holding that notice to the attorney of record constitutes notice to the petitioner holding that the invocation of a presumption of notice requires the agency to prove that the notice was properly addressed holding that due process requires that notice be reasonably calculated under all circumstances to provide parties with notice of the pending action holding that particularized notice requires notice of the precise sanctioning tool to be employed holding that notice to supervisor is notice to city