In non-core proceeding, the Trustee for a debtor who been engaged in a Ponzi scheme sought  coverage under an investment management insurance policy, claiming that the insured debtor had invested money of investors in risky index options rather than in common stocks of U.S. companies, that investors had claims against the Debtor as a result, and that the insurance policy covered the Debtor's liability to the investors.  The Trustee requested a jury trial.
The defendant insurer filed motions for summary judgment and to exclude the testimony of an expert witness.  
Court enters proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to all pending issues to insure that District Court has jurisdiction to conduct de novo review of all appropriate issues pursuant to 28 U.S.C. s 157(c)(1) and Bankruptcy Rule 9033.  Court proposes that the District Court grant defendant insurer's motion for summary judgment on one issue and deny it on all others and that the District Court deny defendant's motions relating to exclusion of expert testimony.   The basis for the Court's proposed entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant is that an insurer is entitled to rescind an investment management insurance policy because of the Debtor insured's omission or misrepresentation of a material fact when the insured was operating a Ponzi scheme.