On September 8, 2026, Trinitas Farming’s debtors and unsecured creditors’ committee filed an amended joint liquidating plan after objections from the U.S. Trustee and Pomona Farming. The proponents said they would seek to resolve the U.S. Trustee’s objection before the confirmation hearing scheduled for October 14, 2026, at 10 a.m. Pacific time, but would pursue confirmation over that objection if necessary. The amendment is a proposal, not a confirmation order. Amended plan filing notice
The plan combines a creditor distribution structure built on settlements with Rabo AgriFinance and Pomona with contested protections against liability. For general unsecured creditors, the economic distinction is between assets designated for their benefit and cash actually available after expenses and reserves. The September 8 plan gives Class 4A priority over Rabo’s deficiency claim and Pomona’s unsecured claim, but does not promise that the designated assets will produce full payment. Proposed liquidating plan, Articles I and III
The U.S. Trustee’s August 31 objection challenged both the injunction and exculpation provisions of the August 4 plan. The Trustee argued that the injunction was ambiguous and could improperly protect successors and other nondebtors from collection or direct claims. The objection also challenged the breadth of the protected parties and the provision allowing reliance on advice of counsel. These are the Trustee’s arguments, not findings by the court. U.S. Trustee objection, pp. 2–3
Pomona’s September 3 limited objection focused on the parties and conduct covered by exculpation. Pomona argued that the August plan extended protection beyond the bounds of its settlement with the estates and beyond the scope permitted by Ninth Circuit authority. Although the plan incorporated the settlement and made it controlling in the event of inconsistency, Pomona sought changes to the operative protection itself. Pomona limited objection, p. 2
The September 8 plan expressly excludes Pomona claims from the general exculpation provision, subject to a narrower protection for specified fiduciary conduct in the plan process. A party invoking that limited protection must demonstrate both a qualifying role and qualifying plan-related conduct. The provision preserves exceptions for intentional fraud, gross negligence, willful misconduct, preserved plan actions, and compliance or noncompliance with the settlement agreement. Proposed liquidating plan, Article XI.C
The proponents’ filing notice does not announce that the U.S. Trustee dispute has been resolved. It instead describes further negotiations and a potential confirmation brief arguing that the objection should be overruled. Amended plan filing notice, p. 2
The unsecured-creditor pool and payment order
The plan rests on four settlements involving, as applicable, the debtors, committee, Rabo, and Pomona. Those agreements address a Rabo contribution for unsecured creditors, a holdback for estate administration, olive-sale proceeds and wind-up costs, and the treatment of Pomona’s claim. The plan proposes substantive consolidation for distributions and resolution of outstanding claims, with a plan administrator handling distributions and the wind-down. Proposed liquidating plan, introduction
Component
September 8 plan treatment
Rabo cash contribution
$2.275 million included in the defined Rabo GUC Gift Cash
Olive-sale contribution
50% of WL Olives net proceeds, capped at $2.25 million
Pomona cash contribution
$100,000 included under the compromise and settlement agreement
Other designated assets
Specified avoidance actions and recoveries, subject to the plan’s collateral and distribution-right limitations
Class 4A available cash
Cash from liquidation of the designated assets after deducting or reserving for the defined expenses
Proposed Sources of General Unsecured Creditor Recoveries
These components are defined in Article I of the proposed plan. The olive contribution is conditional on net proceeds and subject to a cap; the table is not a statement of cash already distributed or a guaranteed creditor recovery.
Allowed Class 4A general unsecured claims would receive their pro rata share of available cash. Class 4A must be paid in full before distributions to Class 4B, Rabo’s deficiency claim, or Class 4C, Pomona’s unsecured claim. The administrator must use commercially reasonable efforts to distribute to claims known to be allowed at effectiveness within 60 days after the effective date. That is an efforts standard tied to effectiveness, not a fixed payment deadline. Proposed liquidating plan, Article III.F
The plan projects no distributions to subordinated claims or equity interests, although it provides for residual distributions if the applicable senior claims and expenses are paid. Proposed liquidating plan, Classes 5 and 6
From almond ranch sales to a liquidating plan
Trinitas entered bankruptcy seeking to sell its almond ranches. Contemporary reporting described a private-equity-backed operation with 17 ranches spanning more than 7,800 acres in California’s Central Valley and attributed its distress to low almond prices and high interest rates. Bloomberg Law
The Business Journal reported that Trinitas sought $30 million in debtor-in-possession financing to maintain production through pollination and the sale process. That report establishes the financing request; it does not establish the amount ultimately drawn or funded. The Business Journal
The September 2026 plan describes how the later settlements allocated sale proceeds between Rabo and estate administration. One agreement provided for a $20 million holdback to complete administration, pay allowed administrative expenses, and support the unsecured-creditor cash contribution where applicable. A subsequent agreement provided for an additional $7 million release to Rabo before confirmation, alongside olive-proceeds and wind-up provisions. Those are settlement terms described by the plan, not a statement of the present holdback balance. Proposed liquidating plan, introduction
Confirmation remains the next decision
The August 28 corrected notice moved the confirmation hearing to October 14, 2026, and the September 8 filing notice repeated that scheduled date. The court’s approval of the disclosure statement for solicitation purposes is distinct from confirmation of the plan. Corrected hearing noticeAmended plan filing notice
This account uses plan and objection text through September 8, 2026, and docket entries reviewed through September 9. The September 9 entry contains an attached court recording; its text does not establish the outcome of that proceeding. Court recording attachment
Donlin, Recano & Company is identified as the claims and noticing agent in the September 8 filing notice. The central issue for the next stage is whether the proponents can resolve the remaining objection or obtain confirmation over it while preserving the plan’s creditor distribution structure. Amended plan filing notice
Sources
Amended plan filing notice /documents/71a4b8f9-0dee-485e-b20a-38c4e339073c/
Proposed liquidating plan, Articles I and III /documents/fcb0c0f3-5141-4d7d-a7a1-bd7cc5ce4c81/
Bloomberg Law https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/private-equity-owned-california-almond-producer-files-bankruptcy
The Business Journal https://thebusinessjournal.com/another-private-equity-farming-giant-falls-with-trinitas-bankruptcy-7856-acres-hitting-the-market/
This article was researched and written with AI assistance, using court filings, public records, and news sources. AI-generated content can contain errors. Verify all information against primary sources before relying on it. This is not legal or financial advice. See the disclaimer.