In thinking about the Hobson case, it occurs to me that it might be
helpful for other OCA affiliates.

1. The documented overcharges have gotten other affiliates free of
continuing OCA obligations.

2. OCA loves to go into court whine about how reasonable and
understanding they are. It would appear that the Judge in
the Hobson case had enough exposure (a lengthy trial, plus
many motions from OCA) to decide that they're anything but
reasonable! Perhaps this might help other courts to see
what "the real OCA" is all about?

There's a pecking order in the federal judiciary. At the top of the
food chain are members of the U S Supreme Court. One step below
those 9 are members of the various 9 Circuit (appeals) Courts.
Federal District Judges are located throughout the US in larger
cities. One notch below the district court are bankruptcy courts.
I'm not a lawyer, but getting cases moved up from the bankruptcy
court in New Orleans to a district court would afford the opportunity
of a jury trial, as well as seemingly letting another court have a
shot at overiding Judge Brown's apparent biases toward keeping OCA's
doors open at the expense of the affiliated doctors? (I understand
from attorneys familiar with current bankruptcy law that the code
tries to keep businesses open in order to avoid throwing a lot of
employees into the unemployment lines.) In the case of OCA, I wonder
if most people's best long term interest (everyone but the lenders)
wouldn't be served by shutting them down?

Entirely my own, personal, non-lawyer's opinion. For competant legal
advice and counsel, check with a licensed attorney.