Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-04295/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-04295-0/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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

523 BURLINGAME AVE., LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

TAPANG,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-04295-BLF 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

PURSUANT TO MOTION OF 

APPELLANT [FED. R. BANKR. P. 8023]

[Re: ECF 6]

On July 29, 2016, 523 Burlingame Ave., LLC (“Appellant”) filed a notice of appeal in this 

Court. ECF 1. The record on appeal in the matter was entered in the docket of this Court on 

August 11, 2016. ECF 4. Thus, Appellant’s principal brief was due on or before September 12, 

2016. Appellant did not file a principal brief. Instead, Appellant filed a motion to dismiss the 

appeal pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8023 alleging that “changed circumstances in the underlying 

and related bankruptcy matters have rendered the appeal moot.” ECF 6. In its motion, Appellant 

states that “Appellee has incurred no allowable costs in relation to this appeal.” Id. 

Appellant properly served the other parties to this action on September 20, 2016. See 

Certificate of Service, ECF 6. Neither the Appellee/Debtor nor the U.S. Trustee filed an 

opposition to Appellant’s motion, and the time for opposition has lapsed. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 

8013(a)–(b).

Under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8023, “[a]n appeal may be dismissed on the appellant’s motion on 

terms agreed to by the parties or fixed by the district court or BAP.” Because Appellant states that 

Appellee has incurred no allowable costs in relation to this appeal, the Court need not determine 

the terms of dismissal. Moreover, because neither the Appellee/Debtor nor the U.S. Trustee has 

opposed Appellant’s motion, the Court finds no reason to deny Appellant its requested relief. 

Case 5:16-cv-04295-BLF Document 7 Filed 10/05/16 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal in this proceeding be dismissed. 

The Clerk shall close the file.

Dated: October 5, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:16-cv-04295-BLF Document 7 Filed 10/05/16 Page 2 of 2