Amr Mohsen V.

695 F. App'x 294
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedAugust 15, 2017
Docket15-60071
StatusUnpublished

This text of 695 F. App'x 294 (Amr Mohsen V.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amr Mohsen V., 695 F. App'x 294 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Chapter 7 debtor Amr Mohsen appeals pro se from the' Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) order dismissing Mohsen’s appeal for lack of prosecution. We review de novo our own jurisdiction. Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs (In re City of Desert Hot Springs), 339 F.3d 782, 787 (9th Cir. 2003). We dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

The bankruptcy court properly certified its March 25, 2014 order as final under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) (“Rule 54(b)”). See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7054(a) (applying Rule 54(b) to adversary proceedings); Ariz. State Carpenters Pension Tr. Fund v. Miller, 938 F.2d 1038, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 1991) (court of appeals must independently determine that the judgment is final). We lack jurisdiction because Mohsen did not file a timely notice of appeal after the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1), (b)(1) (notice of appeal must be filed within 14 days after entry of the order being appealed; time to file an appeal runs from entry of the order disposing of a timely post-judgment tolling motion); 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(2) (an appeal to the BAP must be taken within the time provided by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002); Anderson v. Mouradick (In re Mouradick), 13 F.3d 326, 327 (9th Cir. 1994) (“[T]he untimely filing of a notice of appeal deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court’s order.” (citations omitted)).

*295 Mohsen’s request for oral argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

DISMISSED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
695 F. App'x 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amr-mohsen-v-ca9-2017.