Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04126/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04126-0/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)

---

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 

Northern District of California 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: WB COYLE A/K/A WILLIAM BERNARD 

COYLE A/K/A W.B. COYLE, 

 Debtor. 

Case No.: 15-cv-04126-YGR

ORDER REQUIRING SUPPLEMENTAL 

BRIEFING

PIVOT POINT PARTNERS, LLC, 

 Appellant, 

 v. 

E. LYNN SCHOENMANN, et al.,

 Appellees. 

Appellant Pivot Point Partners, LLC, (“Pivot Point”) brings this appeal challenging the 

bankruptcy court’s grant of appellee E. Lynn Shoenmann’s (the “Trustee”) motion for a preliminary 

injunction against Pivot Point enjoining it from foreclosing on a deed of trust. 

The Court has conducted a preliminary review of the papers and has determined that Pivot 

Point asserted the incorrect standard of review in its opening brief to this Court (see Dkt. No. 7 at 

8:3-18), which the Trustee adopted in her response brief (see Dkt. No. 13 at 4:6-8). Pivot Point and 

the Trustee improperly rely upon the general standards applicable to a district court’s review of a 

bankruptcy court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. See, e.g., In re DAK Industries, Inc., 66 

F.3d 1091, 1094 (9th Cir. 1995). Here, however, the Court reviews the bankruptcy court’s grant of a 

preliminary injunction for an abuse of discretion. In re Morgan-Busby, 272 B.R. 257, 260 (9th Cir. 

BAP 2002); In re First Alliance Mortgage Co., 264 B.R. 634, 644 (C.D.Cal. 2001). “A bankruptcy 

court abuses its discretion if it bases its ruling upon an erroneous view of the law or a clearly 

erroneous interpretation of the facts.” In re Morgan-Busby, 272 B.R. at 260-61 (citing Cooter & 

Gell v. Hartmax Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 (1990)). 

Case 4:15-cv-04126-YGR Document 15 Filed 05/06/16 Page 1 of 2
2 

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 

Northern District of California 

Consequently, the current briefs are inadequate to allow the Court to conduct a meaningful 

review of the decision below. The Court thus affords Pivot Point and the Trustee the opportunity to 

clarify the record and file supplemental briefs to address their arguments in light of the abuse of 

discretion standard of review applicable here. Pivot Point and the Trustee are ORDERED to file 

supplemental briefs of no more than ten (10) pages each by no later than May 20, 2016. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 6, 2016 

____________________________________ 

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:15-cv-04126-YGR Document 15 Filed 05/06/16 Page 2 of 2