Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04375/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04375-1/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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRACE MILES,

Appellant,

 v.

ROYCE MAKISHIMA, et al.,

Apellees. /

No. C-08-4375 MMC

ORDER DENYING APPELLANT’S

CORRECTED REQUEST FOR DIRECT

APPEAL CERTIFICATION

Before the Court is appellant Grace Miles’s (“Miles”) “Corrected Request for Direct

Appeal Certification,” filed October 9, 2008, by which Miles seeks an order certifying for

appeal the Bankruptcy Court’s August 4, 2008 Order Denying Motion to Vacate and

Denying Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration. Having read and considered the papers

filed in support of the request, the Court deems the matter suitable for decision thereon,

see Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), hereby VACATES the hearing scheduled for November 21, 2008, and

rules as follows.

A district court may certify for appeal to the court of appeals a judgment, order, or

decree of a bankruptcy judge (1) that “involves a question of law as to which there is no

controlling decision of the court of appeals for the circuit or of the Supreme Court of the

United States, or involves a matter of public importance;” (2) that “involves a question of

law requiring resolution of conflicting decisions;” or (3) where “an immediate appeal from

Case 3:08-cv-04375-MMC Document 7 Filed 10/22/08 Page 1 of 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

1

Although Miles cites to all three subsections of § 158(d)(2)(A), she provides

argument only as to the first.

2

the judgment, order, or decree may materially advance the progress of the case or

proceeding in which the appeal is taken.” See 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(A).

Here, Miles relies primarily on the first of the above-referenced three grounds.1

 (See

Pl.’s Request at 4.) Miles has failed to make an adequate showing, however, that the

above-referenced order of the Bankruptcy Court “involves a question of law as to which

there is no controlling decision . . . or involves a matter of public importance.” See §

158(d)(2)(A)(i).

Accordingly, the Corrected Request is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 22, 2008 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-04375-MMC Document 7 Filed 10/22/08 Page 2 of 2