Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00303/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00303-0/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 (District or BAP)

---

1

17cv303-JAH (JLB)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: STEVEN HARRY LUCORE, SR. 

and JUDY LYNNE LUCORE,

 

 Debtors.

STEVEN HARRY LUCORE, SR., et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

 v.

U.S. BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE, etc., et 

al.,

Defendants and Appellees.

Civil No.: 17cv303-JAH (JLB)

Bankruptcy No. 13-08534-MM

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

INTRODUCTION

Steven H. Lucore, Sr. and Judy L. Lucore (“Appellants”), proceeding pro per, appeal

from a prefiling order issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern

District of California. Doc. No.1. Having considered the record, the relevant law, the

parties’ submissions, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court DISMISSES the appeal

for failure to prosecute pursuant to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (“FRBP”).

Case 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB Document 12 Filed 08/07/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 5
2

17cv303-JAH (JLB)

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

BACKGROUND

The Lucores filed a Notice of Appeal from Bankruptcy Court and Statement of

Elections on February 15, 2017. Doc. No. 1. On February 27, 2017, the court1 set the

following briefing schedule: (1) no later than March 27, 2017, the court shall receive a

Record of Appeal; (2) by April 24, 2017 Appellants would serve and file the appellate 

opening brief with any supporting evidence; (3) by May 15, 2017 Appellees would serve 

and file the responsive brief and any supporting evidence; and (4) by June 12, 2017,

Appellants would file any reply brief. Doc. No. 2. Any party that was not registered with 

the Case Management and Electronic Case Files system (CM/ECF), including both

Appellants, were served with the order via U.S. Mail Service. See Doc. No. 2.

On March 30, 2017, the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court notified the Court that

Appellants had not taken action to perfect the appeal as provided by FRBP 8009 causing 

delay in the administration of the bankruptcy estate. Doc. No. 3.

On June 28, 2017, the court issued an Order to Show Cause why this appeal should

not be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to both the court's briefing schedule and

the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. Doc. No. 5. The court ordered the parties to

respond within fourteen (14) days from the date on which the order was electronically

docketed. Appellants were again served with the order via U.S. Mail Service. See Id.

On July 11, 2017, Appellants timely filed their response indicating that “they never

received notice of the briefing schedule.” In their response, they requested an amended

briefing schedule and an extension of time to perfect their appeal. Doc. No. 6. Appellees

responded that they were under no obligation to brief an appeal not being prosecuted and

further believed the issue was already being litigated in a separate appeal2

.

 

1 This appeal was originally set before Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel. Pursuant to Local Rule 40.1 (i.e. the 

Low Number Rule) the case was transferred to Judge Janis L. Sammartino on April 25, 2017 (doc.no. 4),

then to this Court on August 11, 2017 (doc. no. 9).

2 The matter of Lucore, Sr. et al v. Barasch et al., case no. 3:17-cv-00034-JAH-JLB is an appeal from

Case 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB Document 12 Filed 08/07/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 5
3

17cv303-JAH (JLB)

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

On September 26, 2017, under the direction of this Court and in relation to a separate

but related appeal, the Bankruptcy Court reentered its February 13, 2017 Amended Order.

In part, the Order directed U.S. Bank to lodge a separate prefiling order in accordance with

the terms as set forth in the Amended Order. See Doc. No. 1 at 17. A separate prefiling

order was submitted by U.S. Bank and entered in the bankruptcy case on September 27,

2017 as docket number 430 (the “Prefiling Order”). See Doc. No. 10 at 3. The Prefiling

Order prohibits the Lucores from filing adversary proceedings which seek to litigate

matters regarding the foreclosure of a specific piece of property without permission of the

bankruptcy court.

On May 21, 2018, the Court directed the parties to meet and confer regarding the

status of this appeal and submit either a separate or a joint statement by June 25, 2018. See

Doc. No. 11. On June 22, 2018, the parties filed a joint statement regarding the status,

however, the section designated for the Lucores’ position on whether the appeal should

proceed contained only a place holder, without any substantive content3

. See Doc. No.10

at 5.

DISCUSSION 

The Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure set forth the time for filing a notice of

appeal. FRBP 8002. A notice of appeal must be filed with the bankruptcy clerk within 14

days after entry of the judgment or order being appealed. FRBP 8002 (a)(l). A notice of

appeal filed after the bankruptcy court announces a decision or order, but before entry of

the judgment is treated as filed on the date of and after the entry. FRBP 8002 (a)(2).

A judgment or order is entered for purposes of this rule when it is entered in the

docket under Rule 5003(a). FRBP 8002(a)(5)(A)(i). However, if Rule 7058 applies and

 

the order dismissing the adversary proceeding in bankruptcy adversary case no. 16-90149-MM. The 

instant appeal, Case No. 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB is an appeal challenging the prefiling order in

bankruptcy case no. 13-08534-MM. Although these appeals stem from two separate bankruptcy cases,

they were briefed and argued on the same day, resulting in the bankruptcy court issuing a joint order. 3 The Court notes that the “Joint Status Report” was neither signed nor dated by the parties.

Case 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB Document 12 Filed 08/07/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 5
4

17cv303-JAH (JLB)

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

Rule 58(a) F.R.Civ.P. requires a separate document, then the judgment is entered when: (1)

the order is set out in a separate document or 150 days from the entry of the judgment,

order, or decree in the docket -whichever occurs first. FRBP 8002(a)(5)(A)(ii).

Once the notice of appeal becomes effective under Rule 8002, the appellant has

fourteen (14) days to file with the bankruptcy clerk and serve on the appellee a designation

of the items to be included in the record on appeal and a statement of the issues to be

presented. FRBP 8009. The appellee may then file any additional items to be included in

the record. Id.

Pursuant to these rules, the Prefiling Order from which the Lucores now appeal was

deemed entered on July 13, 2017; 150 days from the date on which the bankruptcy court’s

Amended Order was docketed. Although the Prefiling Order was not set out in a separate

Document until late September 2017, the passage of sufficient time as set forth in Rule

8002(a)(5)(A)(ii) was the determining factor for entry of judgment. Accordingly, the

Lucores had until July 27th, 2017 to file and serve a designation of the items to be included

in the record on appeal. Assuming Appellants did not receive either copy of the briefing

schedule mailed to them, they were still under an obligation to comply with the Federal

Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. Clinton v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. (In re Clinton),

449 B.R. 79, 83 (9th Cir. BAP 2011) (pro se litigants in bankruptcy proceedings are not

excused from compliance with procedural rules); see also In re Wells, 13 F. App’x 544 

(9th Cir. 2001) (affirming the BAP’s dismissal of an appeal for failure of a pro se appellant 

to comply with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, the Federal Rules of Appellate

Procedure, and the BAP Rules); Bankr. Appellate Panel 9th Cir., Rule 8018(a)-2, (the BAP

clerk may dismiss the appeal if appellant fails to file “an opening brief timely, or otherwise

fails to comply with rules or orders regarding processing the appeal.”).

The Court recognizes that Appellants may have believed- as Appellee’s believe that 

the Lucores had fourteen days from the day the Prefiling Order was docketed to designate 

the record of appeal. Such leniency with a pro se appellant in appropriate circumstances

may be deserving. However, the Prefilling Order subject to this appeal was docketed over

Case 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB Document 12 Filed 08/07/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 5
5

17cv303-JAH (JLB)

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

nine months ago. Appellants have made no attempt to designate the record after: (1)

receiving an order to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute, (2) appearing before the Court and discussing the status of the appeal, and (3)

meeting and conferring with counsel. Further Appellants opted not to provide this Court

with their position on whether the appeal should proceed in either a joint or separate status

report.

Accordingly, the Court finds it appropriate to DISMISS this appeal for failure to

prosecute in accordance with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 6, 2018

 

_________________________________

HON. JOHN A. HOUSTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00303-JAH-JLB Document 12 Filed 08/07/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 5