MedAvail Holdings, Inc. – Preference and Fraudulent Transfer Defense Lawyer

On January 23, 2026, Alfred T. Giuliano, as the chapter 7 trustee for the bankruptcy estates of MedAvail Holdings, Inc. et al., including the estate of MedAvail Technologies, Inc., began filing complaints seeking to avoid and recover payments made during the 90 day period prior to the bankruptcy filing, as preferential under Section 547 and/or fraudulent under Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code. Approximately 16 such complaints have been filed so far.

The bankruptcy case and these adversary actions are before Judge J. Kate Stickles.

The Debtors in these cases are MedAvail Holdings, Inc. (Case No. 24-10148-JKS); (ii) MedAvail, Inc. (Case No. 24-10149-JKS); (iii) MedAvail Technologies (US), Inc. (Case No. 24-10150-JKS); (iv) MedAvail Pharmacy Inc. (Case No. 24-10151-JKS); and (v) MedAvail Technologies, Inc. (Case No. 24-10152-JKS).

For more information as to defenses that may be available to these avoidance actions, please see our page on Preference Defense Litigation and please see our page on Defense of Fraudulent Transfer Actions.

Common Defenses in Preference Actions

The United States Bankruptcy Code provides many affirmative defenses to preference actions, contained within Section 547(c). For example, the most common defenses that may be available to a Defendant under Section 547(c) may include:

• the transfer was a contemporaneous exchange for new value given to the debtor (i.e., the debtor received something of value in exchange for the transfer); 11 U.S.C. §547(c)(1);
• after such transfer, Defendant gave new value to or for the benefit of the debtor (i.e., the Defendant extended additional credit to the Debtor after receiving the transfer) 11 U.S.C. §547(c)(4); or
• the transfer was in payment of a debt incurred by the debtor in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs of the debtor and the recipient (i.e., Defendant made the transfer under ordinary business terms). 11 U.S.C. §547(c)(2).

Common Defenses in Fraudulent Transfer Cases

Among the more common defenses that may be available are that you provided reasonably equivalent value for a transfer that is now alleged to be constructively fraudulent or in good faith provided value to the debtor in exchange for the transfer. There may be other defenses available to you by showing that the Transfer does not fit the statutory predicates. For example, solvency of the debtor or that the tr

The following Adversary Proceedings were filed in the bankruptcy of MedAvail Holdings, Inc., Case No. 24-10148-JKS on January 23 and 30, 2026:

26-50007-JKS Giuliano v. Cigna Healthcare, Inc.
26-50008-JKS Giuliano v. Humana, Inc.
26-50013-JKS Giuliano v. Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.
26-50014-JKS Giuliano v. Stubbs, Alderton & Markiles, LLP
26-50015-JKS Giuliano v. Equiniti Trust Company, LLC
26-50016-JKS Giuliano v. Rivers & Moorehead, PLLC
26-50017-JKS Giuliano v. BGSF Professional, LLC
26-50018-JKS Giuliano v. LifeSci Advisors, LLC
26-50019-JKS Giuliano v. Inflow Communications, Inc.
26-50023-JKS Giuliano v. Squire Patton Boggs US LLP
26-50024-JKS Giuliano v. Prime Technology Group Inc
26-50025-JKS Giuliano v. Misty Mountain Technologies Inc.
26-50026-JKS Giuliano v. RingCentral Inc.
26-50027-JKS Giuliano v. Artifex Software, Inc.
26-50028-JKS Giuliano v. RSM US LLP
26-50030-JKS Giuliano v. BDO Consulting Group, LLC