In re: SuiteCentric, LLC v. Paul Ross Seibert, et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: June 24, 2026
• Docket: 2:26-cv-00916
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 In re: CASE NO. C26-916-KKE 8

SUITECENTRIC, LLC, BANKRUPTCY NO. 25-12449-TWD 9 Debtor(s). ORDER DISMISSING BANKRUPTCY 10 APPEAL 11

12 PAUL ROSS SEIBERT, Appellant(s), 13 v.

14 SUITECENTERIC, LLC, et al., Appellee(s). 15

16 This matter comes before the Court on its own motion. On March 16, 2026, Appellant 17 Paul Ross Seibert, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal of an order by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 18 Timothy W. Dore confirming a bankruptcy plan with respect to Debtor SuiteCentric, LLC. Dkt. 19 No. 1 at 23–29. Judge Dore entered that order on January 23, 2026. Id. at 23, 25. Seibert elected 20 to appeal to this Court rather than the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Id. at 26. Because Seibert’s 21 appeal is untimely, the Court will dismiss this appeal and direct the Clerk to close this case. 22 23 24 1 Subject to certain exceptions that do not apply here,1 Rule 8002 of the Federal Rules of 2 Bankruptcy Procedure requires that “a notice of appeal must be filed with the bankruptcy clerk 3 within 14 days after the judgment, order, or decree to be appealed is entered.” FED. R. BANKR. P. 4 8002(a)(1). This deadline is jurisdictional, meaning that “[a]n untimely notice deprives the district 5 court of jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court’s order or judgment.” In re Souza, 795 F.2d 6 855, 857 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting In re Ramsey, 612 F.2d 1220, 1222 (9th Cir. 1980)); see also 7 Fantasia v. Diodato, 154 F.4th 1123, 1131 (9th Cir. 2025) (“The deadline to file a bankruptcy 8 appeal under Rule 8002 is ‘mandatory and jurisdictional.’” (quoting In re Ozenne, 841 F.3d 810, 9 814 (9th Cir. 2016))). Because the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear an untimely bankruptcy appeal, 10 it may dismiss such an appeal sua sponte. In re Ramsey, 612 F.2d at 1222 (dismissing appeal as 11 untimely after raising the issue at oral argument). 12 Seibert filed this appeal 52 days after Judge Dore’s decision—more than a month too late.

13 After SuiteCentric’s counsel identified the untimeliness of the appeal via a declaration (Dkt. No. 14 5), Seibert filed a response, arguing that the 14-day appeal deadline should be “tolled” based on 15 SuiteCentric’s “[c]oncealment of [a]ssets”—which Seibert claims he did not discover until weeks 16 after Judge Dore’s order. Dkt. No. 8 at 2. Because the appeal deadline is jurisdictional, however, 17 “courts lack authority to create equitable exceptions.” In Re McClure, No. 2:19-CV-02810-GW, 18 2019 WL 12375549, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 28, 2019) (citing Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 19 (2007)); see also Melendres v. Maricopa Cnty., 815 F.3d 645, 649 (9th Cir. 2016) (“[W]e are not 20 at liberty to overlook a defect with the notice of appeal no matter how compelling an appellant’s 21

22 1 Subsections (b) and (c) of Bankruptcy Rule 8002 provide limited exceptions to the 14-day appeal deadline where the appellant either is incarcerated or files a timely motion for relief from the judgment, order, or decree that is the 23 subject of the appeal. In addition, subsection (d) authorizes the bankruptcy court, on a motion, to extend the time to file a notice of appeal if the motion is filed within the time otherwise permitted by Rule 8002 or within 21 days after that time expires if the party shows excusable neglect. Seibert does not claim that any of these exceptions applies 24 here. See Dkt. No. 8. 1 argument may be.”); Brecht v. Klein, No. C24-1949JLR, 2025 WL 2592198, at *2 (W.D. Wash. 2 Sept. 8, 2025) (“The court does not have authority to extend its jurisdiction via equitable doctrines 3 [to reach untimely bankruptcy appeals].”), appeal dismissed, No. 25-6390, 2025 WL 4038020 (9th

4 Cir. Dec. 30, 2025). Seibert identifies no authority supporting his argument that the mandatory 5 14-day deadline may be tolled based on “bad faith” or “fraud on the estate[.]” Dkt. No. 8 at 2. 6 Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The Clerk is DIRECTED 7 to close this case. 8 9 Dated this 24th day of June, 2026. 10 A 11 Kymberly K. Evanson 12 United States District Judge

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24