May 24, 2012

Solyndra Executives Refusing to Answer Bankruptcy Questions

Top executives at Solyndra have refused to tell U.S. officials whether they received executive bonuses after the company began to fail, and they have frustrated bankruptcy proceedings by refusing to provide any insight into the company’s sudden and dramatic shut-down, according to papers filed by Justice Department lawyers late Friday.

Solyndra's CEO Brian Harrison and Chief Financial Officer Bill Stover at Capitol Hill for a House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing.Susan Walsh/APA

Solyndra attorney told U.S. officials the reason he would not identify the company’s customers or talk about its contracts was because “the topic would likely be the subject of investigation and possibly litigation,” according to the court filing.

Among the questions executives declined to answer, according to the new bankruptcy filing: ”Whether Solyndra has a plan to repay the loan obtained from the U.S. Government.”

Word of Solyndra’s refusal to cooperate in bankruptcy proceedings comes just days after two top Solyndra executives declined to answer questions from Congress, invoking their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Details about their refusal to answer questions were revealed in papers filed by the attorneys representing the U.S. government during bankruptcy proceedings in Delaware. The solar company was awarded a $535 million federal loan as part of President Obama’s program to help spur growth in emerging forms of alternative energy. Now, federal lawyers are seeking to recover at least some of that money.

In their filing, government attorneys called on the bankruptcy court judge to put the company in the hands of an independent trustee, so its books could be pried open.

“Management’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment does not excuse them from performing their fundamental disclosure and reporting duties under the Bankruptcy Code,” the filing says.

One topic of concern to federal attorneys is the accuracy of Solyndra’s financial statements. According to a report Thursday by Bloomberg, a focus of a federal investigation into the firm’s behavior is whether it lied to Energy Department officials in order to secure additional financing after the company started to fail.

Friday’s filings note that Solyndra executives refused to say “whether financial information submitted or represented to investors, creditors, and others was accurate.”

The executives have also refused to say when they determined the company was in financial trouble, and “whether the company paid management bonuses after management realized the company’s poor financial condition.”

“Such topics lie at the core of the information that [Solyndra] must disclose,” the court filing said.

A spokesman for Solyndra has not replied to an email or phone calls seeking comment. In a separate filing earlier this month, Solyndra wrote: “The company is not aware of any wrongdoing by Solyndra officers, directors or employees in conjunction with the DOE loan guarantee or otherwise … ”

With Friday’s bankruptcy court filing, key questions emerge. Among them: What impact will the executives’ refusal to answer questions have on creditors’ attempts to recover money as the bankruptcy case moves forward? The U.S. loaned more than a half billion dollars to the startup company, but will stand behind investors in seeking to recover.

“Typically we don’t comment beyond our filing itself,” said Jane Limprecht, a spokeswoman for the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees.

In March, ABC News, in partnership with the Center for Public Integrity's iWatch News , began reporting on simmering questions about the process that led the Obama administration to make Solyndra the first company to receive a loan under a program designed to provide government support to companies that would create jobs while generating energy from cleaner sources, such as solar, wind and nuclear. President Obama personally visited the Solyndra complex, hailing it as a leader in this emerging field. Solyndra's prime investor, George Kaiser, bundled donations for Obama in 2008.

In August, though, Solyndra abruptly shut its doors, laying off 1,100 workers. And within days it declared bankruptcy. The FBI raided the plant days later, part of an investigation that involves inspector generals for the Energy Department and the Treasury Department. In addition, Republicans in the House Energy and Commerce Committee have been working to dissect the deal and understand how signs of Solyndra's financial trouble had been overlooked by the Department of Energy

Reprinted by Permission © 2012, The Center for Public Integrity®. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Matthew Mosk is a Producer at ABC News

202-466-1300

About the Author

Senior Reporter iWatch

Greene joined the Center after serving as investigations and government editor for The Miami Herald. He also spent nine years at the paper exposing slave-like conditions in Florida’s farm fields, investigating deadly air cargo plane crashes and uncovering corruption at Miami’s airport. Greene is author of Night Fire: Big Oil, Poison Air, And Margie Richard’s Fight To Save Her Town, and his work has been honored by the Gerald Loeb Awards, National Press Club, Investigative Reporters and Editors and National Headliner Awards. Greene was part of four ...

202-466-1300

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.