Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00508/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00508-8/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)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re

DEMAS WAI YAN, aka DENNIS YAN

Debtor.

_________________________________

WEI SUEN

Plaintiff/Appellant v

DEMAS YAN, et al,

Defendants/Appellees

 /

 No CV 06-0508 VRW

(Appeal from Bankr No 04-33526)

 ORDER

This order clarifies procedural issues pertaining to

the court’s adjudication of this appeal.

This case is one of three appeals that resulted from

the Amended Judgment of the Bankruptcy Court in In re Demas Wai

Yan dated March 3, 2006. The Notice of Appeal for the first

appeal, Yan v Fu, et al, Appeal No 06-00509, was filed on January

1, 2006; this appeal was dismissed by stipulation on August 23,

Case 3:06-cv-00508-VRW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 1 of 4
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

2

2006, following settlement. The second appeal, Chen v Yan,

Appeal No 06-00363, was filed on January 20, 2006. This appeal

was dismissed by stipulation on August 23, 2006, for the same

reasons as the first appeal. The Notice of Appeal for the

instant appeal, Suen v Yan, et al, was filed in this court on

January 26, 2006.

The parties filed a series of stipulated extensions of

time delaying proceedings on this appeal. See eg, Doc #9, 10,

11, 13-16, 23. In each case, the stipulation represented that

the parties were close to settlement. No statement of issues was

ever filed. Fed R Bankr P 8006. Apparently due to appellant’s

failure to perfect the appeal, moreover, the bankruptcy court

record was never transmitted to the district court. Appellant

filed his Opening Brief on Appeal nearly sixteen months after the

appeal was filed, on May 17, 2007. Inexplicably, the brief

attached a “Second Amended Statement of Issues and Designation of

Record,” even though no previous statement of issues and

designation of record was ever filed. With the opening brief,

bankruptcy trustee Janina Elder’s brief was filed on June 14,

2007, and appellant submitted a reply brief on June 21, 2007. 

The appeal is now fully briefed, although this court has yet to

receive the record on appeal. 

Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8006 requires an

appellant, within ten days of filing the notice of appeal, to

file with the court 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 * * *.” The local

rules of this court require that the record on appeal include “a

Case 3:06-cv-00508-VRW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 2 of 4
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

3

transcript of the hearing or a summary thereof agreed upon by all

parties.” BLR 8006-1. If an appellant fails to prosecute the

appeal as required, he or she is subject to “such action as the

district or bankruptcy court deems appropriate, which may include

dismissal of the appeal.” Fed R Bankr P 8001.

The court also has the authority to dismiss a case for

lack of prosecution pursuant to its inherent authority, in order

to prevent “undue delays in the disposition of pending cases,

docket congestion, and, the possibility of harassment of a

defendant.” Medeiros v US, 621 F2d 468, 470 (1st Cir 1980). 

Even where the party has not shown actual prejudice, “prejudice

is presumed from unreasonable delay.” Moore v Telfon

Communications Corp, 589 F2d 959, 967-68 (9th Cir 1978).

In this case, appellant failed timely to perfect the

appeal. The statement of issues and designation of record on

appeal was due on February 6, 2006. Appellant submitted the

exhibit entitled Second Amended Statement of Issues and

Designation of Record on May 17, 2007, sixteen months after the

Notice of Appeal was filed, with no explanation for the delay. 

It is not even clear that he filed this paper with the Bankruptcy

Court, which would finally have prompted action by the clerk of

that court.

Appellant states in the reply brief that “if the Court

indicates that it would be helpful to have the entire record

recreated, [appellant] will undertake the project.” Doc #34 at

1. Appellant also states that “[u]nless and until the Court

indicates it would have a use for [the record] * * *, this would

seem to be a waste of resources for no purpose * * *.” Id. This

Case 3:06-cv-00508-VRW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 3 of 4
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

4

reply demonstrates confusion about the procedural rules

applicable to bankruptcy appeals. The requirements for

perfecting an appeal are not optional or flexible; they are

jurisdictional and therefore mandatory.

Appellee has not moved to dismiss for failure to

perfect the appeal but complains in her brief that appellant’s

excerpts are insufficient for purposes of briefing and review of

the matter. Appellee’s Br at 18-20. She does not argue for

dismissal, but asks the court to disregard issues newly raised in

appellant’s brief. Id.

 It is within the court’s power to dismiss the appeal

due to the procedural errors that have hampered review. Given

the lack of a motion by the appellee, the court refrains from

dismissal at this point and will consider appellee’s request to

disregard certain issues in connection with its review of the

merits. The court hereby orders appellant to perfect his appeal

no later than July 6, 2007 in compliance with the Federal Rules

of Bankruptcy Procedure and the Bankruptcy Local Rules of this

court. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this appeal.

For the foregoing reasons, the court VACATES the

hearing date scheduled for July 12, 2007. The hearing on this

matter will take place on August 2, 2007 at 2:00 pm.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:06-cv-00508-VRW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 4 of 4