Pacifica of the Valley Corporation - Chapter 11 Plan Terms

Plan Terms

Overview

• Pacifica of the Valley Corporation filed a combined disclosure statement and Chapter 11 plan of liquidation on Oct. 30, 2026. The plan carries out a global settlement among the debtor, the official committee of unsecured creditors and Axios Capital Solutions, LLC, which is both the debtor's prepetition secured lender and its DIP lender. Under the settlement, Axios's designee, Sun Valley Hospital Company, will buy substantially all of the debtor's assets for a credit bid of at least $40 million; Axios's remaining claims against the estate are capped at $15 million and can be recovered only from the net proceeds of a liquidating trust under a negotiated sharing waterfall; and any Axios claims above that cap are taken on by the designee.
• The liquidating trust receives the Excluded Assets, which include estate causes of action, D&O insurance claims, the debtor's interests in Pacific Gardens Medical Center (PGMC) and at least $500,000 of cash. Trust interests go to general unsecured creditors. Under proposed settlements with the taxing authorities, priority tax claims would be allowed at amounts capped at $36.7 million in total and receive one-third of the trust's share of net proceeds under the sharing waterfall, with general unsecured creditors taking the other two-thirds.
• The court has not yet approved solicitation. The debtor proposes a Nov. 10, 2026, hearing on conditional approval of the disclosure statement and a Dec. 17, 2026, combined hearing on final approval and confirmation. It will file the motion seeking approval of the Axios sale shortly after the plan.
• The debtor runs Pacifica Hospital of the Valley in Sun Valley, California, a 231-bed safety-net acute care hospital that treats more than 50,000 patients a year. It also runs a separately licensed 98-bed subacute skilled nursing unit, a behavioral health urgent care clinic and a medical surgical program. About 84% of its patients live at or below the poverty line, and Medi-Cal provides about 85% of revenue. As of July 4, 2026, the debtor had about 697 employees, about 538 of them represented by SEIU 121 RN and SEIU-UHW.
• Several pressures combined into a liquidity crisis: the COVID-19 pandemic, rising labor costs, state-mandated seismic retrofit requirements, and delayed Hospital Quality Assurance Fee (HQAF) and Disproportionate Share Hospital reimbursement payments. Legacy liabilities, operational problems and lender litigation in Colorado made it worse. Accordingly, the debtor filed on an emergency basis on July 4, 2026, with rapidly dwindling liquidity and no access to incremental DIP financing. Shortly before filing, it appointed Peter Chadwick of Berkeley Research Group as CRO. The debtor first operated on cash collateral under interim orders. It then obtained DIP financing from Axios and, as part of that financing, agreed with Axios and the committee on the plan term sheet that sets out the global settlement. The debtor says the sale will ensure continuity of patient care and preserve about 697 jobs.

Axios Sale

• Credit bid: at least $40 million under section 363(k), credited against the purchase price. Axios's DIP claim is applied first, before any portion of its prepetition claim.
• The global settlement provides for the sale of substantially all assets other than the Excluded Assets, free and clear of liens, claims and encumbrances. Axios chose a private sale under section 363 rather than a sale through the plan. The debtor's upcoming sale motion will ask the court to approve:
  • the sale, including the health care system, meaning the hospital, the subacute skilled nursing facility, the behavioral health urgent care clinic and the hospital's other programs
  • the form of asset purchase agreement
  • procedures for assuming and rejecting executory contracts
• The debtor puts Axios's combined prepetition and DIP claims at about $74 million, excluding additional interest and fees:
  • The prepetition claim was not less than $50.9 million at the petition date. About $31.5 million of it has been or will be rolled up into the DIP claim, leaving about $19.4 million plus accrued interest and fees.
  • After the roll-up and the commitment fee, the DIP claim has a principal balance of not less than $54.6 million.
• On those figures, the debtor says the sale satisfies at least $59 million of secured claims. That is the $40 million credit bid plus about $19 million of claims the designee assumes as Assumed Axios Debt, defined as any Axios claims left after the credit bid in excess of $15 million. The remaining $15 million is Axios's claim against the liquidating trust.
• Axios has made two further concessions:
  • Any part of its DIP claim above the credit bid that would otherwise be an allowed administrative claim will instead be treated with its Class 1 secured claim.
  • Once the sale closes, Axios will not recover or claw back any amounts paid during the case.
• The debtor also credits the structure with two further sources of value. First, Axios commits to fund operating losses and capital expenditures for the term of the interim management services agreement (IMA), under which the debtor is hospital operator and the designee is manager. Second, the deal is expected to resolve about $13.8 million of claims asserted by the hospital's landlord, Reliq Pacifica LLC and Beverly Gemini Investments, LLC (together, Reliq).

Operational Transition

• Axios must obtain the required licenses, including hospital and pharmacy licenses, and change-of-ownership approval for the provider agreements. Until it does, the post-effective date debtor will oversee management and operation of the health care system under the IMA, acting through a responsible officer to be named in the plan supplement. Axios or its designee pays the post-effective date debtor's expenses.
• The post-effective date debtor:
  • keeps its corporate existence and full rights to receive payments, including Medi-Cal, Medicare and HQAF payments
  • uses its existing operating accounts under an operating budget to be filed with the plan supplement
  • handles any operations Axios is not allowed to undertake under applicable law
• Operating advances that Axios or its designee makes to fund shortfalls after the IMA takes effect are part of the Axios DIP claim.
• The debtor's restructuring committee will stay on as the governing board, or a new post-effective date board will be formed. Remaining directors fill vacancies after consulting the liquidating trustee and Axios.
• The trustee, after consulting the board, may dissolve the post-effective date debtor once three things happen: the sale is completed, licenses transfer to Axios, and related documents such as the IMA are signed.

Sharing Agreement and Axios Claim Cap

• The trust and Axios share net proceeds of the trust assets under a three-tier waterfall that the plan calls the Sharing Agreement:
  • The trust keeps the first $1 million for distributions to general unsecured creditors and/or payment of expenses.
  • Next, the trust and Axios split net proceeds 50/50 until Axios has received $4 million.
  • After that, net proceeds go 75% to the trust and 25% to Axios until Axios's $15 million allowed claim is paid in full. From then on, the trust keeps all net proceeds.
• The trust's share goes one-third to allowed priority tax claims and two-thirds to Class 5 general unsecured claims. Priority tax claims are paid pro rata and over time as the liquidating trust agreement provides.
• Axios may not assert more than $15 million in total against the estate or for purposes of sharing in Excluded Asset proceeds. It also may not receive more than $15 million in total from the trust out of the Excluded Assets.
• The plan term sheet requires one of two outcomes on Reliq:
  • Axios and Reliq sign a new lease consistent with a nonbinding agreement in principle on lease terms among the debtor, Axios and Reliq.
  • Otherwise, all estate claims against Reliq pass to the designee at closing, together with the debtor's privilege and work product relating to Reliq and the master lease. These claims include recharacterization of the master lease, avoidance claims and claims under the subordination agreement.
• Axios agreed that any net cash recovery on Chapter 5 claims against Reliq goes to the liquidating trust for distribution.

DIP Financing

• Size: up to $52.5 million in total principal of senior secured postpetition financing from Axios, before the commitment fee and interest. This consists of up to $21 million of new money term loans, available in multiple tranches, and a roll-up of prepetition obligations up to $31.5 million, calculated at 1.5 times the cash actually advanced postpetition.
• The debtor filed the DIP motion on Sept. 28, 2026 (Docket No. 217). The court entered the interim DIP order on Sept. 30 (Docket No. 229) and the final DIP order on Oct. 15 (Docket No. 250). The debtor and Axios entered into the credit agreement on Oct. 16, 2026.
• Use of proceeds: liquidity to keep the hospital operating during the case and to fund the plan process.
• The Axios DIP claim includes the roll-up, the DIP facility fee, accrued interest, fees and expenses, and any operating advances under the IMA.
• The facility requires the debtor to sell substantially all of its assets to Axios, either through a plan or a private section 363 sale at Axios's choice. It also requires the debtor to file, solicit and seek confirmation of a plan consistent with the plan term sheet attached to the credit agreement. The term sheet contemplates:
  • the sale of the health care system to Axios
  • a liquidating trust for general unsecured creditors, funded with avoidance actions and other estate causes of action
  • funding of the case's administrative expenses
• Under the credit agreement, the debtor also agreed to send the Colorado lender litigation back to state court to proceed only against Paul R. Tuft (see Pending Litigation and Open Issues).

Treatment of Claims and Interests

• Administrative claims (unclassified, not entitled to vote; estimated at about $8.6 million; 100% estimated recovery): paid in full in cash on the later of the effective date and allowance, or in the ordinary course. Requests are due 60 days after the effective date. The debtor says the administrative claim requests filed exceed its estimate of allowed administrative claims. It is still reviewing and reconciling them and may object.
• Professional fee claims (unclassified, not entitled to vote): final fee applications are due 45 days after the effective date. They are paid first from the professional fee escrow, which was set up in connection with the interim DIP order and is held by the claims agent. Any shortfall is paid from the debtor's remaining cash, and any surplus goes to the liquidating trust. The trustee may not object to final fee applications.
• Priority claims (unclassified, not entitled to vote; estimated at about $17,150; 100% estimated recovery): paid in full in cash.
• Priority tax claims (unclassified, not entitled to vote): allowed at the Schedule 1 amounts, capped at $36.7 million in total. Holders receive, pro rata and over time as the liquidating trust agreement provides, one-third of the trust's share of net proceeds under the Sharing Agreement, in full satisfaction of the claims (see Taxing Authority Settlements).
• Class 1, Axios secured claim (impaired, entitled to vote):
  • The claim is allowed in full. When the sale closes, it is reduced by any amount by which the credit bid exceeds the Axios DIP claim.
  • For any secured claim above the credit bid, Axios's only recovery is its Sharing Agreement share of trust proceeds. That share, together with the DIP claim, is capped at $15 million in total.
  • Any DIP or secured claim above $15 million becomes Assumed Axios Debt. The designee assumes it, and it cannot be recovered from the debtor, the estate or the trust.
• Class 2, Reliq claim (impaired, entitled to vote; estimated at about $13.8 million as of the petition date, plus postpetition amounts not yet determined):
  • If Axios and Reliq sign a mutually acceptable new lease in connection with the sale, the claim is deemed fully satisfied and released. Reliq then receives nothing beyond payment of its administrative claims under the master lease.
  • If they do not, the claim, in whole or in parts, will be classified as administrative (for postpetition master lease obligations), secured, general unsecured or subordinated. Allowance, classification, amount and treatment will be decided by further court order.
• Class 3, claim of the Local Initiative Health Authority for Los Angeles County (L.A. Care), which bought HQAF receivables from the debtor before filing (impaired, entitled to vote; estimated at about $7.5 million):
  • If the challenge period expires without a challenge, or a challenge fails, L.A. Care has no claim against the estate and receives nothing.
  • If a successful challenge gives L.A. Care an allowed claim, that claim ranks junior to the Axios secured claim, which is not being paid in full. It therefore becomes wholly unsecured and is treated as a Class 5 general unsecured claim.
• Class 4, other secured claims (unimpaired, deemed to accept; estimated at $0): at the debtor's discretion, payment in full in cash, other treatment that leaves the claim unimpaired, or return of collateral or setoff.
• Class 5, general unsecured claims (impaired, entitled to vote; estimated at about $83.5 million): holders receive pro rata liquidating trust interests, which entitle them to two-thirds of the trust's share of net proceeds under the Sharing Agreement.
  • The plan ties the estimated recovery to that waterfall rather than giving a percentage.
  • The debtor says a material portion of general unsecured recoveries is expected to come from litigation claims, whose value and outcome are uncertain.
  • This class also includes tax penalty claims, claims for insurance deductibles and self-insured retentions, and allowed rejection damages claims.
• Class 6, insured claims (impaired, entitled to vote; estimated at $0): personal injury, medical malpractice, wrongful death and employment claims covered by insurance. They recover only from available insurance proceeds and get no distribution from the debtor or the trust.
• Class 7, subordinated claims (impaired, deemed to reject; estimated at $0; 0% estimated recovery): cancelled with no distribution.
• Class 8, interests (impaired, deemed to reject; 0% estimated recovery): cancelled with no distribution.
• Because Classes 7 and 8 are deemed to reject, the debtor will seek confirmation under the section 1129(b) cramdown standard.
• The debtor projects that administrative, priority and other secured claims will be paid in full. Recoveries on priority tax, general unsecured, Reliq, L.A. Care and Axios claims will depend on various assumptions. The debtor's liquidation analysis will be filed with the plan supplement or earlier.
• Executory contracts and unexpired leases are rejected on the effective date unless they have already been assumed or rejected, are the subject of a pending motion, are scheduled for assumption in the plan supplement, or are insurance policies. Rejection claims are due 30 days after the effective date.

Taxing Authority Settlements

• Allowed priority tax claims are fixed at the Schedule 1 amounts, capped at $36.7 million in total. They receive their pro rata share of one-third of the trust's net Sharing Agreement proceeds over time. That payment fully satisfies the claims and any liability of current officers or directors arising from them.
• Tax penalty claims are treated as Class 5 general unsecured claims, with the same full-satisfaction effect.
• Entry of the confirmation order approves the settlements without a separate motion, settlement agreement or order. That approval is a condition to the effective date.
• Schedule 1 puts total taxing authority claims at $55.3 million: $36.7 million priority and $18.7 million non-priority. The disclosure statement breaks them down as follows:
  • IRS: $30.1 million priority ($26.6 million of tax and $3.5 million of interest) and $14.1 million non-priority, including $12.3 million of penalties, for $44.2 million in total
  • California Employment Development Department: $5.7 million priority ($5 million of tax and $692,173 of interest) and $1.5 million non-priority, including $1.4 million of penalties, for $7.3 million in total
  • California Franchise Tax Board: $2.3 million, none of it priority, made up of $962,272 of tax, $736,798 of interest and $633,689 of penalties, based on an Aug. 27, 2025, notice of balance due
  • Los Angeles County Treasurer and Tax Collector: $81,567 priority. Its proof of claim also asserts $356,791 of secured claims, which the debtor disputes, and $9,000 non-priority, while Schedule 1 lists $365,792 as non-priority.
  • City of Los Angeles Office of Finance: $785,175 priority and $283,232 non-priority
• The debtor is still reconciling the tax amounts and reserves all defenses. It warns that the taxing authorities may not agree to the settlements. If they do not:
  • the debtor may need to object to priority tax claims or seek a tax determination
  • any priority tax claim that is not settled and is ultimately allowed would have to be treated under section 1129(a)(9)(C), which may require payment in full with interest in amounts materially greater than the settlements contemplate
  • because those claims rank ahead of general unsecured claims, that could reduce general unsecured recoveries and, if large enough, make the plan infeasible

Liquidating Trust

• On the effective date, the trust receives the Excluded Assets free and clear. They include:
  • the debtor's interests in or related to PGMC
  • all causes of action and litigation, including avoidance actions, other than those released under the plan
  • director and officer insurance claims
  • any excess HQAF revenue the debtor generates by reducing asserted setoffs or recoupment, above the HQAF identified in the 13-week budget attached to the final DIP order, as long as it does not hurt future HQAF receipts
  • a cash contribution of at least $500,000 from the debtor's cash on hand at the effective date, excluding Disproportionate Share Hospital funds not identified in that budget
• After the effective date, once administrative and priority claims are paid or reserved for, the debtor transfers any additional estate funds to the trust. Two kinds of funds are excluded: assets that belong to Axios under the sale, and Axios-funded amounts kept under the IMA and operating budget.
• Any surplus in the professional fee escrow also passes to the trust.
• The debtor's insurance rights relating to trust causes of action are deemed assigned to the trust. The debtor must keep paying premiums and may not cancel policies without the trustee's consent.
• Trustee and oversight:
  • The committee picks the trustee after consulting the debtor and Axios. The trustee will be named in the plan supplement and can be removed only by a final order finding gross negligence or willful misconduct.
  • A three-member oversight committee, two chosen by the committee and one by Axios, has approval rights over key trustee decisions.
  • The trust agreement must be acceptable to the committee. It may be amended on five business days' written notice to the post-effective date debtor and Axios; if either objects in writing, court approval is required.
  • The committee dissolves on the effective date, though its professionals and the debtor's may represent the trustee.
• The trustee has exclusive standing to pursue and settle estate causes of action and will pursue only those expected to produce a net positive recovery after costs. Preserved claims include:
  • breach of fiduciary duty and avoidance claims against Paul R. Tuft
  • claims relating to PGMC
  • D&O insurance claims
  • preference and fraudulent transfer claims
  • claims against former owners or controlling persons of the debtor, and against former professionals who are not released
  • claims for failure to remit payroll, withholding, trust fund or other taxes
  • claims against health plans, payors, landlords and insurers
• A full list of causes of action will be filed with the plan supplement. Prepetition privileges pass to the trust on the effective date. Postpetition privileges pass on the later of the effective date and the date the IMA takes effect.
• The trust ends on the earlier of final distribution and the fifth anniversary of the effective date, subject to court-approved fixed-term extensions.
• Trust interests are uncertificated, cannot be transferred except on death or by operation of law, and carry no voting rights.

Prepetition Capital Structure

• Secured debt: about $50.9 million was outstanding at the petition date, including accrued interest, fees, costs and expenses, secured by liens on substantially all of the debtor's personal property.
  • The debt arises under a Main Street Priority Loan Agreement the debtor signed on Dec. 10, 2020, with First Western Trust Bank and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, under which First Western made a $35 million senior secured loan.
  • Axios bought the loan from First Western in November 2025.
• Reliq is the landlord under an Aug. 30, 2013, master lease.
  • It asserts about $13.8 million of accrued unpaid rent and other obligations as of the petition date.
  • It also asserts a security interest in all of the debtor's personal property, based on a UCC-1 filed in November 2022. That lien was subordinated to First Western's interest, now held by Axios, under a subordination agreement.
• Before filing, the debtor sold L.A. Care the right to receive designated future HQAF receivables for immediate cash.
  • The two sales were structured as true sales and covered $7.5 million of HQAF payments that the debtor expected to receive later in the year of the filing.
  • As a protective measure, the debtor also gave L.A. Care a backup security interest in the receivables.
• The debtor estimates unsecured claims at about $83.5 million, including amounts owed to taxing authorities, trade vendors and other ordinary course debt.

Pending Litigation and Open Issues

• L.A. Care: a challenge period for the committee and Axios is still pending. It covers the debtor's stipulation that its prepetition HQAF receivable sales to L.A. Care were true sales.
  • The stipulation is in the court's Aug. 3, 2026, order (Docket No. 115), entered on the debtor's July 29 emergency motion (Docket No. 97). The order also approved a sale of HQAF receivables to L.A. Care.
  • The motion also sought a release of estate claims and administrative claims in L.A. Care's favor.
  • The challenge outcome decides L.A. Care's Class 3 treatment.
• Colorado litigation: the debtor has agreed that the Colorado lender litigation will go back to state court and proceed only against Paul R. Tuft.
  • First Western sued the debtor and Tuft in May 2025 in the District Court of Denver County, Colorado, over the debtor's alleged failure to repay the loan on time. Axios took First Western's place after buying the loan in November 2025.
  • The Colorado court appointed a special monitor to investigate the debtor's operations on May 15, 2026. On June 26, 2026, it denied Axios's summary judgment motion, ruling that a jury must first decide whether common ownership made the loan transfer invalid.
  • The debtor removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Under the credit agreement, it then agreed to remand. Recovery sought from Tuft is capped at the allowed prepetition secured debt amount plus postpetition interest, fees, costs and expenses under the applicable guaranty.
• Reliq lease: the issue is unresolved.
  • The effective date requires the sale to close. Closing depends on several factors, including the designee and Reliq agreeing a new lease or resolving assumption of the master lease.
  • The debtor warns that without a new lease, litigation is likely over recharacterization of the master lease, equitable claims, cure amounts and adequate assurance. That litigation could materially delay or prevent closing; if the sale does not close, the plan will need to be materially modified.
  • In that case the debtor cannot assure extended cash collateral access or alternative financing to fund the hospital until another transaction closes. If the hospital closed rather than being sold as a going concern, the debtor says liquidation proceeds would likely be materially lower, receivable collections would be reduced and delayed, and the estate would face substantial additional claims, including rejection damages and employee severance claims that Axios would otherwise assume or pay as buyer.
  • The court extended the debtor's deadline to assume or reject nonresidential real property leases through Jan. 30, 2027 (Docket No. 259).
• PGMC: the debtor is negotiating with PGMC's landlord and other parties claiming an ownership interest in PGMC.
  • It expects to reach an agreement in principle before the effective date on PGMC and its facility lease, through mediation or binding arbitration, or through a settlement approved with confirmation.
  • Any PGMC settlement needs the committee's consent, which it may give or withhold in its sole and absolute discretion.

Releases, Exculpation and Injunction

• The Released Parties are:
  • the debtor
  • the members of the debtor's two-member restructuring committee
  • Peter C. Chadwick, as CRO
  • the committee's members, solely in that capacity
  • Axios, as DIP lender and prepetition lender
  • the court-approved estate and committee professionals. The debtor's court-approved professionals include Dentons US, Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones, Berkeley Research Group and Houlihan Lokey; the committee retained Sills Cummis & Gross, Ice Miller and Province.
• Debtor release: the debtor and estate release the Released Parties from all claims relating to the debtor and its management, ownership and operation, its liquidation, the case, asset sales, the restructuring and the plan.
  • The release excludes willful misconduct, actual fraud, bad faith or gross negligence, as determined by final order.
  • It does not release obligations under the plan and does not act as a discharge.
  • Trust assets exclude claims against Released Parties.
• Third-party release: opt-in only.
  • The releasing parties are holders of claims or interests who return an opt-in form to the claims agent by the Dec. 10 voting deadline, plus the committee and each of its members, along with their successors and assigns.
  • Opt-in forms go to both voting and non-voting creditors.
  • The release has the same carve-outs as the debtor release.
• Exculpation: covers the Released Parties other than Axios, for good-faith acts between the petition date and the effective date relating to the case, the sale and the plan. It excludes willful misconduct, fraud, bad faith or gross negligence.
• The liquidating trustee and the post-effective date board are expressly not exculpated. However, the trustee, its professionals and the board are liable only for willful misconduct, fraud, bad faith or gross negligence, and the trust and estate indemnify them for good-faith conduct.
• Holders of claims against or interests in the debtor that arose before the effective date are permanently barred from pursuing the debtor, the estate, the trust or trust assets on those claims, except to enforce the plan; holders of timely filed claims may still litigate allowance and payment under the plan.
• The debtor does not receive a discharge under section 1141(d)(3).

Conditions Precedent

• The effective date requires:
  • the Axios sale to have closed, with no plan proposed on terms contrary to the plan term sheet
  • a confirmation order that approves the tax settlements and has not been stayed
  • creation of the trust, court appointment of the trustee and signing of the trust agreement
  • the trust cash contribution to be fully funded and released to the trustee
  • no order blocking consummation
  • signing of all implementing documents
• The debtor may waive any effective date condition in writing without a court order, except the trust cash contribution condition, which needs the committee's written consent.
• Confirmation requires:
  • a disclosure statement acceptable to the debtor and Axios
  • a plan and plan documents reasonably satisfactory to Axios and the committee
  • a confirmation order reasonably satisfactory to the debtor, Axios and the committee
  • a plan supplement acceptable to the debtor
  • the debtor's determination that it will have enough cash on the effective date to pay, or reserve for, allowed administrative, priority and priority tax claims in full or over time, except as the tax settlements provide
  • no force majeure event, defined as a significant global disruption in the financial markets caused by war, terrorism or other incidents, but not general adverse market changes
• The debtor may waive any of the confirmation conditions.

Key Dates

• The debtor proposes the following solicitation and confirmation schedule:
  • Nov. 6, 2026, at 4:00 p.m.: deadline to object to conditional approval of the disclosure statement
  • Nov. 9, 2026, at 12:00 p.m.: reply deadline
  • Nov. 10, 2026: voting record date, with the conditional approval hearing proposed for 3:00 p.m.
  • Nov. 11, 2026: expected entry of the conditional approval and procedures order. Solicitation packages are to be served and notice published within four business days after entry.
  • Dec. 3, 2026, at 4:00 p.m.: deadline to file the plan supplement and Rule 3018 motions
  • Dec. 10, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Eastern Time): deadline for votes, release opt-in forms and plan objections
  • Dec. 14, 2026, at 4:00 p.m.: deadline to file the confirmation brief, supporting evidence and voting tabulation
  • Dec. 17, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Eastern Time): combined hearing on final approval of the disclosure statement and confirmation
• The Sept. 23, 2026, bar date order set the general claims bar date at Oct. 30, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. prevailing Eastern Time, and the governmental bar date at Dec. 31, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. prevailing Eastern Time.
• The deadline to assume or reject nonresidential real property leases runs through Jan. 30, 2027.
• Deadlines measured from the effective date:
  • rejection damages claims: 30 days after
  • final fee applications: 45 days after
  • administrative claim requests: 60 days after
  • claim objections: 180 days after, renewing automatically for further 180-day periods

Parties and Advisors

• Debtor: Pacifica of the Valley Corporation d/b/a Pacifica Hospital of the Valley. Its counsel are Dentons US LLP and Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP; Berkeley Research Group provides CRO Peter Chadwick, and Houlihan Lokey Capital, Inc. is investment banker.
• Axios Capital Solutions, LLC: buyer, DIP lender and prepetition lender, represented by Raines Feldman Littrell LLP.
• Committee: appointed July 20, 2026, and made up of McKesson Medical-Surgical, Inc., Sun Valley Emergency Physicians, P.C., Sierra Health Group, SERRA Community Medical Clinic d/b/a SERRA Medical Group and SEIU United Healthcare Workers-West. Its counsel are Sills Cummis & Gross P.C. and Ice Miller LLP, and Province (Province, LLC and StoneTurn Group, LLP) is financial advisor.
• Liquidating trustee: to be named in the plan supplement.