Section 704(1) provides that a trustee shall close an estate as expeditiously as is compatible with the best interests of the estate. Delays in case closure diminish the return to creditors, undermine the creditors' and public's confidence in the bankruptcy system, increase the trustee's exposure to liability, raise the costs of administration, and, in cases involving non-dischargeable pre-petition tax liabilities, expose the debtor to increased penalties and interest. Delays also give rise to public criticism of the bankruptcy process.

To ensure compliance with § 704(1), the United States Trustee monitors the number and age of open cases and the reasons they remain open. The United States Trustee gives heightened scrutiny to a trustee's administration of older cases and may request additional information from the trustee regarding the status of administration."

Wells of Justice, representing the public interest, hereby requests that you supervise trustee, Bernard J. Natale to adhere to Federal Bankruptcy Law in the case of Amy Kinsella, number 01 B 71054 to abandon his unlawful demands, return all money that he has coerced from non-debtors, and close the case. Bernard J. Natale maliciously keeps the case open for his personal enrichment.

This case was filed in March 2001. As of February 2002, the trustee has known that the debtor was prepared to pay her creditors outside of bankruptcy. The trustee maliciously administered this case to hinder creditors from accepting payment from the debtor, until August 2002 when the judge entered an order by default denying the discharge of debts. As of August 2002, creditors were paid in full. In the case record, filed in November 2002, the debtor provided evidence of payment to all creditors besides one. The one creditor not paid in full is an attorney that is pursuing collection in the Judicial Circuit Court of McHenry Count. What is the justification for keeping this case on the presumably congested docket of the Bankruptcy Court? Surely, it cannot be that the trustee needs to collect assets for the bankruptcy estate, for there are no creditors. What will he do with the money he has strong-armed from non-debtors and the money he seeks from the debtor that puts food in her childrens' mouth and pays for the roof over their head? There is nothing the trustee can possibly do with the money other than divert 100% of it to his compensation.

The debtor and several non-debtor defendants in this case, have reported that you personally deny any and all responsibility to supervise Bernard J. Natale according to federal bankruptcy law. Based on information and belief, your support of Bernard J. Natale's extortion actions is based on nothing more than hearsay of what Bernard J. Natale has alleged to justify his actions, absent of evidence and absent of federal bankruptcy law.

The trustee, Bernard J. Natale, has demonstrated in other cases involving denial or revoke of discharge, that he diverts 100% of the assets to his compensation on the justification that since debts have not been discharged, that creditors must directly seek payment of debts from the debtor. There is no reason to believe that Bernard J. Natale will not do the same in this case.

Your office and Bernard J. Natale have confirmed the complicity of Judge Manuel Barbosa in extortion and embezzlement schemes. While you sit back and allow Bernard J. Natale to abuse the law, and refuse to supervise him, Judge Manuel Barbosa enters orders approving Bernard J. Natale's unlawful demands and violations of federal bankruptcy law. This deceptively devised plan of your office that relinquishes accountability to a conspiring judge, obstructs justice, and aids and abets criminal activity. The color and claim of official right does not mean that Bernard J. Natale is innocent, but rather, evidences Judge Manuel Barbosa's conspiracy made possible by your lack of fulfilling your duty to supervise the trustee.

Bernard J. Natale's malicious actions in this case undermine the public's confidence in the bankruptcy system, raises the costs of administration for his personal enrichment, and brings rise to public criticism of the bankruptcy process.

Attached are documents that are part of the public case record. We would also provide replies to motions from the trustee, Bernard J. Natale, if he had filed replies. An examination of the docket sheets for the bankruptcy case and adversary cases show that Bernard J. Natale has not responded to any of the motions filed by the four defendants in this case. He is incapable of, or unwilling to document any alleged lawful basis and merits to support his position.