Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-03563/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-03563-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 The court's records, however, suggest that a copy of the briefing schedule was mailed to

Lona's present address. See Docket No. 7 Service Receipt (Oct. 7, 2008).

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL BRIEF

No. C-08-03563 RMW

TSF

E-FILED on: 1/21/2009 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

In re: CORRINA CURIEL LONA,

 Debtor.

CORRINA CURIEL LONA,

 Appellant,

v.

JOSE ABREU dba INTERTEL

COMMUNICATIONS,

 Appellee.

No. C-08-03563 RMW

[Re Docket Nos. 8, 14]

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME

TO FILE APPEAL BRIEF

Debtor Corrina Curiel Lona appeals from a bankruptcy court order after trial overruling

Lona's objection to appellee Jose Abreu dba Intertel Communications claim against her in the

amount of $439,000. Shortly after beginning the appellate process, Lona decided to represent

herself. See Docket No. 3 (Aug. 4, 2008). This change in counsel may have led to Lona's failure to

receive the clerk's notice setting a briefing schedule for the appeal.1

 The briefing schedule called for

Case 5:08-cv-03563-RMW Document 16 Filed 01/21/09 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL BRIEF

No. C-08-03563 RMW

TSF 2

Lona's opening brief to be due on November 6, 2008. Docket No. 7 (Oct. 7, 2008). It also set

deadlines in November and December for Abreu's opposition brief and any reply briefing. See id.

Lona failed to file her opening brief on appeal. On December 11, Abreu moved to dismiss

the appeal for failure to prosecute. Upon receipt of Abreu's motion to dismiss, Lona claims that she

became aware of the briefing schedule. Thus, on December 31, 2008, Lona filed a motion for an

extension of time to file her opening brief, which the court also construes as an opposition to the

motion to dismiss. The court has reviewed the papers and determined that this matter can be

determined without oral argument. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). 

The failure to comply with the court's briefing order may justify dismissal of an appeal. 

Bankr. R. 8001; In re Scheri, 51 F.3d 71, 74 (7th Cir. 1995). Nonetheless, the case law is clear that

dismissal – the ultimate sanction – is not favored as a first corrective measure. See, e.g.,

English-Speaking Union v. Johnson, 353 F.3d 1013, 1022-23 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (suggesting

alternative sanctions like fines or paying the appellee's attorney's fees). Indeed, as a general matter,

dismissal tends to only be appropriate upon a showing of the appellant's bad faith or prejudice to the

appellee. See id. Abreu has made no showing of prejudice in support of his motion to dismiss, and

any evidence of Lona's bad faith has not been developed.

The court therefore grants Lona's motion for an extension of time. Since many months have

passed since Lona designated the record and identified the issues she seeks to appeal, the court

extends the time for her to file her appellate brief to February 6, 2009. An opposition brief (and any

cross-appeal) from Abreu will be due on February 27, 2009. Any reply brief (and opposition to any

cross-appeal) will be due on March 11. Any reply to the opposition to any cross-appeal will be due

on March 25. If the court deems a hearing necessary, it will schedule one. A failure by Lona to file

her appellate brief by February 6 will result in the court issuing an order to show cause why the

appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution.

DATED: 1/21/2009

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:08-cv-03563-RMW Document 16 Filed 01/21/09 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL BRIEF

No. C-08-03563 RMW

TSF 3

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to:

Counsel for Appellee:

Stevan Chazen Adelman sca@millermorton.com

Office of the U.S. Trustee

Nanette Dumas Nanette.Dumas@USDOJ.gov 

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not

registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Notice of this document has been mailed to:

Appellant:

Corrina Curiel Lona

360 Kiely Blvd.

Suite 100

San Jose, CA 95129

Trustee, John W. Richardson:

Charles P. Maher 

Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, LLP

Rincon Center II

121 Spear Street

Suite 200

San Francisco, CA 94105

USBC Manager – San Jose

USBC Manager-San Jose 

US Bankruptcy Court 

280 South First Street 

Room 3035 

San Jose, CA 95113 

Honorable Roger L. Efremsky

Roger L. Efremsky 

U.S. Bankruptcy Court 

280 South First Street 

Room 3035 

San Jose, CA 95113 

Dated: 1/21/2009 TSF

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:08-cv-03563-RMW Document 16 Filed 01/21/09 Page 3 of 3