Case ID: f-appx_677/html/0328-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE: Guillermina AGUILAR, Debtor. Guillermina Aguilar, Appellant, v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC; et al., Appellees.
    Nos. 15-60000
    15-60001
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted January 18, 2017
    
    Filed January 30, 2017
    Guillermina Aguilar, Pro Se
    Kerry W. Franich, Severson & Werson, Irvine, CA, Bernard Kornberg, Jan T. Chilton, Attorneys, Severson & Werson APC, San Francisco, CA, for Appellees Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, Indy Mac Mortgage Services, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
    Matthew Edward Podmenik, Attorney, Matthew B. Learned, Esquire, Attorney, McCarthy & Holthus LLP, San Diego, CA, for Appellee Quality Loan Servicing Corporation
    Joseph C. Delmotte, Attorney, Pite Duncan, LLP, San Diego, CA, for Appellee, Pite Duncan, LLP
    Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes these cases are suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Guillermi-na Aguilar appeals pro se from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders granting relief from the automatic stay and dismissing Aguilar’s adversary proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo BAP decisions, and apply the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling. Boyajian v. New Falls Corp. (In re Boyajian), 564 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by granting relief from the automatic stay because Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC presented evidence establishing that it had a colorable claim to the property at issue. See Arkison v. Griffin (In re Griffin), 719 F.3d 1126, 1128 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam) (“[Bjecause final adjudication of the parties’ rights and liabilities is yet to occur, a party seeking stay relief need only establish that it has a colorable claim to the property at issue.”); Moldo v. Matsco, Inc. (In re Cybernetic Servs., Inc.), 252 F.3d 1039, 1045 (9th Cir. 2001) (setting forth standard of review).

Aguilar has waived any other challenge to the order lifting the automatic stay and any challenge to the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing her adversary proceeding for lack of standing. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[0]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We review only issues which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief.”).

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