In Re: Szanto

Opinion

Peter Szanto, Case No.: 22cv1142-JO-BGS

Debtor-Appellant, ORDER AFFIRMING v. BANKRUPTCY COURT’S DISMISSAL FOR IMPROPER Chase Bank, VENUE Creditor-Appellee. Debtor-Appellant Peter Szanto filed this action appealing the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing his bankruptcy case, In re Peter Szanto, Case No. 22-01558-CL11 (Bankr. S.D. Cal.), for improper venue. Dkt. 1 (Notice of Appeal); Dkt. 10 (Appellant’s Opening Brief), Ex. A. For the following reasons, the Court affirms the bankruptcy court’s order. On July 22, 2022, the bankruptcy court issued a fifteen-page written decision dismissing Szanto’s bankruptcy case for improper venue. Dkt. 10, Ex. A. The order set forth in detail the bankruptcy court’s factual and legal findings that Szanto failed to establish venue under any of 28 U.S.C § 1408’s prongs, including domicile, residence, principal place of business, or location of principal U.S. assets. Id. On August 3, 2022, Szanto filed a notice of appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order to this Court. Dkt. 1. District courts have jurisdiction to hear appeals from final judgments, orders, and decrees of bankruptcy judges. 28 U.S.C. § 158. “The bankruptcy court’s findings of fact reviewed for clear error, while its conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.” Jn re Strand, 375 F.3d 854, 857 (9th Cir. 2004) (citing Galam v. Carmel (In re Larry's Apt., L.L.C), 249 F.3d 832, 836 (9th Cir. 2001)); see also In re Greene, 583 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir. 2009) (district courts and circuit courts apply the same standard of review in reviewing bankruptcy court decisions). The court must accept the bankruptcy court’s findings of fact unless “the court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been \}committed.” Greene, 583 F.3d at 618. Upon reviewing the record in this case, the Court finds that the bankruptcy court applied the correct legal standards for determining proper venue and committed no error in findings of fact. The bankruptcy court correctly applied each prong of the 28 U.S.C. § 1408 analysis to determine venue. Dkt. 10, Ex. A (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1408; Fed. R. Bankr. 1014(a)(2); In re Donald, 328 B.R. 192, 199 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2005)). It also set forth extensive factual findings based on the record supporting its conclusion that Szanto failed to meet the standards for proper venue. Szanto identifies no errors in the bankruptcy court’s factual findings or its legal conclusions and this Court has not discovered any in its review. Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the bankruptcy court’s order and DIRECTS the Clerk to close the case. Dated: June 15, 2023 71 Ho orgbfe Tinsook Ohta United States District Judge