Halloum v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: January 13, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-02424
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 In re: Yousif H. Halloum, Case No. 2:24-cv-02424-CDS

5 Debtor BK-23-10842-gs Appeal Reference: 24-39 __________________________________________________ 6 Order Dismissing Appeal, Denying as Moot 7 Yousif H. Halloum, Appellant’s Motion for Permission to File Electronically, and Denying as Moot 8 Appellant Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss

9 v. [ECF Nos. 4, 7] 10 Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB,

11 Appellee 12 13 This action, filed by pro se appellant Yousif H. Halloum, is an appeal from the order 14 terminating automatic stay issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of 15 Nevada. ECF No. 1. Halloum moves for permission to use and register for electronic case filing. 16 Mot., ECF No. 4. However, because Halloum did not timely file his notice of appeal, I dismiss 17 the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, the pending motion to file electronically is denied 18 as moot. Likewise, appellee Wilmington Savings Fund Society’s motion to dismiss is denied as 19 moot. 20 I. Background1 21 Halloum filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition in March 2023. ECF No. 1 in In re Yousif H. 22 Halloum, BK-23-10842-gs. In October 2023, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB filed a 23 motion for relief from an automatic stay. ECF No. 34 in In re Yousif.2 Argument on the motion 24

25 1 The underlying matter is In re Yousif H. Halloum, BK-23-10842-gs. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 201, a court may take judicial notice of court records and court proceedings. Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 26 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001); see also Reyn’s Pasta Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc., 442 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir. 2006) (“We may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record.”). 2 The docket entries cited in this section are found in the underlying bankruptcy matter. 1 was heard on October 25, 2023, and the bankruptcy court granted Wilmington Savings’ motion 2 for relief from the automatic stay for cause under Section 362(d)(1). Hr’g tr., ECF No. 50 in In re 3 Yousif at 14:11–15:10. The court ordered Wilmington Savings to circulate the proposed order to 4 Halloum3 “in order to make sure that the order is consistent with what [the judge] stated on the 5 record here today.” Id. at 15:11–16. The proposed order was served on Halloum on October 25, 6 2023. ECF No. 51 in In re Yousif at 2. In accordance with U.S. District of Nevada Bankruptcy 7 Court Local Rule 9021, counsel certified they received “no response” from Halloum to approve or 8 disapprove the proposed order. Id. Thus the order granting the motion and terminating 9 automatic stay was issued on November 1, 2023. ECF No. 51 in In re Yousif. The notice of entry of 10 the order terminating the automatic stay was filed the same day. ECF No. 52 in In re Yousif. The 11 order, and the notice of its entry, were mailed to Halloum on November 1, 2023. Id. at 2. In March 12 2024, the chapter 13 bankruptcy trustee moved to dismiss the action because Halloum failed to 13 confirm a plan in approximately twelve months since the date of filing. ECF No. 85 in In re Yousif. 14 The trustee argued that without a confirmed plan, distributions and collection efforts were 15 forced to halt. Id. at 2. It further asserted that Halloum’s failure to confirm a plan caused 16 unreasonable delay that is prejudicial to creditors. Id. The motion to dismiss was granted on 17 September 9, 2024. ECF No. 122 in In re Yousif. On December 27, 2024, Halloum filed a notice of 18 appeal from the order terminating the automatic stay. ECF No. 136 in In re Yousif. 19 II. Discussion 20 Federal Rule of Bankruptcy 8002(a) provides that an appeal from a bankruptcy court’s 21 decision must be filed “within 14 days of the date of entry of the judgment, order, or decree being 22 appealed.” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1). As the Ninth Circuit has held, “[t]he provisions of 23 Bankruptcy Rule 8002 are jurisdictional; the untimely filing of a notice of appeal deprives the 24 appellate court of jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court’s order.” In re Mouradick, 13 F.3d 25

26 3 The court also ordered the proposed order be circulated to Halloum’s counsel of record, George Haines. Hr’g tr., ECF No. 50 in in In re Yousif at 15:11–16. 326, 327 (9th Cir. 1994); see In re Souza, 795 F.2d 855, 857 (9th Cir. 1986) (explaining that the Rule 2} 8002 time limits will be strictly construed “[b]ecause of the jurisdictional implications”). 3 Here, Halloum did not file his notice of appeal within fourteen days of the bankruptcy 4|| court’s order granting the motion for relief from automatic stay. It was more than one year after 5}| the date of the bankruptcy judge’s order before Halloum filed his notice of appeal, which is well beyond the fourteen-day limit. See ECF No. 1. And the notice does not set forth any explanation 7|| for the untimely appeal. Thus, I lack jurisdiction to consider an appeal of the bankruptcy court’s 8]| decision on November 1, 2023. As Halloum’s untimely notice of appeal “deprives [this] court of 9}| jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court’s order,” this court is not inclined to address his 10]| appeal on the merits.* In re Mouradick, 13 F.3d at 327. Because I lack jurisdiction, I am therefore 11} unable to consider appellee Wilmington Savings Fund Society’s motion to dismiss and therefore 12]| deny it as moot. 13/111. Conclusion 14 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Halloum’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of 15]| jurisdiction. 16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Halloum’s motion for permission to use and register 17} for electronic case filing [ECF No. 4] is DENIED as moot. 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Wilmington Savings Fund Society’s motion to dismiss [ECF No. 7] is DENIED as moot. 20 The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. / ) 21 Dated: January 13, 2025 Lf 22 Cristina ). Silva 23 United tates District Judge 24 /

In light of this finding, it is not necessary for the court to discuss the appellee’s other grounds for denial of the appeal.