The bk court, which sits in equity, has the right to retain jurisdiction over a previously filed case and any order it issued out of that case. Under 11 USC 105(a):

"The court may issue any order, process or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. No provision of this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary or appropriate to enforce or implement court orders or rules or to prevent an abuse of process."

You are a serial filer therefore your actions fall under 11 USC 362(c) and (d) as it relates to the lifting of the automatic stay.

Under (d)(4) a creditor who is secured by real property has the right to seek in rem relief by asking the bk court to find that the actions of a debtor were part of a scheme to delay, hinder and defraud the creditor as it relates to the real property. If such a finding is made (and apparently such was made in your case) the court can grant an order that takes away the protection of the automatic stay in any subsequently filed case. Such an order “shall be binding in any other case. . . purporting to affect such real property filed not later than 2 years after the entry of such order by the court. . .”

The lender asked the Judge to modify his prior order prohibiting you from filing for 1 year. He was asked to extend the in rem protections afforded creditors under 362(d)(4) for the additional year. I see nothing wrong with that.

Basically the game you have been playing is over.

Des.