In re: Ahmad Jamaleddin Aljindi
This text of In re: Ahmad Jamaleddin Aljindi (In re: Ahmad Jamaleddin Aljindi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED JUL 7 2022 SUSAN M. SPRAUL, CLERK NOT FOR PUBLICATION U.S. BKCY. APP. PANEL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: BAP No. CC-21-1235-GFS AHMAD JAMALEDDIN ALJINDI, Debtor. Bk. No. 6:17-bk-11311-MH
AHMAD JAMALEDDIN ALJINDI, Appellant. MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California Mark D. Houle, Bankruptcy Judge, Presiding
Before: GAN, FARIS, and SPRAKER, Bankruptcy Judges.
INTRODUCTION
Ahmad Jamaleddin Aljindi purports to appeal the bankruptcy court’s
orders denying his motion to reopen his chapter 7 1 case and denying his
motion to expunge and seal the records of his case. However, Mr. Aljindi
does not attach those orders to his notice of appeal, and the bankruptcy
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication. Although it may be cited for whatever persuasive value it may have, see Fed. R. App. P. 32.1, it has no precedential value, see 9th Cir. BAP Rule 8024-1. 1 Unless specified otherwise, all chapter and section references are to the
Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101–1532, and all “Rule” references are to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. court docket does not evidence any such orders or motions. The only order
attached to Mr. Aljindi’s notice of appeal—and the only one entered on the
bankruptcy court docket—is the order denying Mr. Aldjindi’s request to
waive the fee for reopening his case. Consequently, that is the only order at
issue in this appeal.
In his Opening Brief, Mr. Aljindi expressly states that he is not
appealing the bankruptcy court’s decision to deny the fee waiver, and he
offers no argument relevant to the bankruptcy court’s decision to deny his
request. We AFFIRM.
FACTS2
Mr. Aljindi filed a voluntary chapter 7 petition in February 2017. He
received his discharge, and the case was closed, in June 2017. Three years
later, Mr. Aljindi filed an application to waive the filing fee to reopen his
case, using Official Form 103B. He contends that he also filed a motion to
reopen the case and a motion to expunge and seal the records of his case,
but those motions do not appear on the bankruptcy court’s docket.
In October 2021, the bankruptcy court entered an order denying
Mr. Aljindi’s request to waive the fee to reopen. Mr. Aljindi timely
appealed.
2 Mr. Aljindi did not provide excerpts of the record. We exercise our discretion to take judicial notice of documents electronically filed in the bankruptcy case. See Atwood v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Co. (In re Atwood), 293 B.R. 227, 233 n.9 (9th Cir. BAP 2003). 2 JURISDICTION
The bankruptcy court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and
157(b)(2)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158.
ISSUE
Did the bankruptcy court abuse its discretion by denying
Mr. Aljindi’s motion to waive the fee to reopen his case?
STANDARD OF REVIEW
We review the bankruptcy court’s order denying a waiver of filing
fees for abuse of discretion. Bishop v. Mann (In re Bishop), BAP Nos. AZ-06-
1362-DNK; AZ-06-1445-DNK; AZ-07-1023-DNK, 2007 WL 7532285, at *3
(9th Cir. BAP Nov. 5, 2007). A bankruptcy court abuses its discretion if it
applies an incorrect legal standard or its factual findings are illogical,
implausible, or without support in the record. TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v.
Edriver Inc., 653 F.3d 820, 832 (9th Cir. 2011).
DISCUSSION
In appropriate circumstances, bankruptcy courts have authority to
waive fees in bankruptcy cases. 28 U.S.C. § 1930(f). The court may waive a
chapter 7 debtor’s filing fee “if the court determines that such individual
has income less than 150 percent of the income official poverty line . . . and
is unable to pay that fee in installments.” Id. If the bankruptcy court waives
a chapter 7 debtor’s filing fee, it may also waive other bankruptcy fees for
such debtor, including the fee to reopen the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1930(f)(2).
3 Mr. Aljindi provides no argument in his opening brief why the court
erred by denying his application for a fee waiver and has thus waived the
issue. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999). Moreover,
Mr. Aljindi states in his Opening Brief: “As of the date and time of this
informal brief, the Debtor/Appellant is NOT appealing the fee waiver. The
Debtor/Appellant is appealing the Denial/Rejection of the Motion to
Reopen and the Motion to Expunge.”
There is no evidence that the bankruptcy court ruled on a motion to
reopen or a motion to expunge. 3 Neither the motions nor orders disposing
of them appear on the bankruptcy court docket. Accordingly, we lack
jurisdiction to consider the appeals which Mr. Aljindi seeks to pursue.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we AFFIRM the bankruptcy court’s denial of
Mr. Aljindi’s motion to waive the fee to reopen his case.
3 Pursuant to Rules 9021 and 5003, an order is not effective unless entered on the bankruptcy court’s docket. 4
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In re: Ahmad Jamaleddin Aljindi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ahmad-jamaleddin-aljindi-bap9-2022.