2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 6-21-2010 

# In Re: Irwin Ja cob owit z P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 10-1369

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " In Re: Ir win J a c o bowitz " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1134. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1134CL D- 1 9 6 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 10- 1369

___________ I n r e : I RW I N J AC OB OW I TZ; PEARL H . J AC OB OW I TZ, A p p e llan ts

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 09- cv- 00441) D istric t Ju d g e : H o n o ra b le A . R ich a rd C a p u to

____________________________________ S u b mi t t e d f

o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l P u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) o r S u m m a ry A c tio n P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6 M ay13, 2010 B efor e: B A R R Y , FI SH E R and C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udges

Fi l ed: J une 21, 2010

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM I r w i n and Pear l J acobow i t z ( “the debt or s ”) fi l ed a Chapt er13 bankrupt cypet i t i on i n 2006. T heypr opos ed s ever al pl ans , buti tappea r s fr om t he B ankrupt cyC our tdocket th a t n o p lan w a s a c tu a llyc o n f irm e d . N o n e th e les s, th e U n ited S tate s T ru ste e m o v e d to di s m i s s t he ca s e bec aus e of a m at er i al defa ul tbyt he debt or s w i t h r es pectt o t he t erm s of2

t he pl an. T he B ankrupt cyC our tgr ant ed the mot i on and di s m i s s ed the ca s e on J anuary13, 2009. T he debt or s appea l ed. T heys ubm i t t ed thei rnot i ce of appea l i n t he B ankrupt cy C our ton February11, 2009. T he mat t er , i ncl udi ng the debt or s ’ s t at ementof i s s ues on a p p e a l a n d d e s ig n a te d re c o rd , a p p e a re d o n th e D is tr ic t C o u rt ’s d o c k e t o n M a rc h 1 0 , 2 0 0 9 . T h e U n ited S tate s T ru ste e so u g h t, an d w a s g ra n ted , lea v e to d e sig n a te a d d iti o n a l it e m s to be i ncl uded i n t he r ecor d on appea l . N ot hi ng el s e happe ned i n t he ca s e unt i l D ece m ber2, 20 09 , w hen t he D i stri ctC ou rtenter ed a sho rtorder di sm i ssi ng t he case fo r the d ebtor s’ f a ilu re to f

o llo w R u le 8 0 0 9 (a ) o f

th e F e d e ra l R u les o f

B a n k ru p tcy P ro c e d u re (re latin g to t he r equi r ementt o fi l e and s erve br i efs w i t hi n 10 ( now 14) day s aft erentr yof the appe al on t he docke t ) . T he debt or s fi l ed a not i ce of appea l on J anuary19, 2010. A lth o u g h the d eb tors’ fil ed their no ti ce o f a p p ea l m o re tha n 3 0 d ay s af ter th e e n try o f th e D istric t C o u rt’s o rd e r, th e n o tice w a s tim e lyf iled a n d w e h a v e ju risd ictio n o v e r th is a pp e a l be c a us e t he U ni t e d St a t e s Tr us t e e w a s a nd i s a pa r t yt o thi s s ui t . Se e F. R. A . P. 4( a) ( 1) ( B ) ; I n r e Perr yH ol l ow M gm t . C o. , 297 F. 3d 34, 38 ( 1s tC i r . 2002) ( expl ai ni ng t hat “[t ]he U nit ed S t at es, i t s officer , or agen cyi s a ‘ party ’ t o a case n ot onl yw here i ti s a n am ed p artyto the ap p ea l, see In re L loy d , C arr, & C o . , 6 1 7 F . 2 d 8 8 2 , 8 8 4 n . 1 (1st C ir . 1 9 8 0 ), b u t al so w h ere ith as a cti v elyp arti cipa ted in the p roc ee d ing s, see id.; cf. In re S errato, 11 7 F . 3 d 4 2 7 , 4 2 9 (9th C ir . 1 9 9 7 )”).3

W e mays um m ar i l yaff

i r m i f no s ubs t ant i al ques t i on i s pr es ent ed on appe al . See L .A .R . 2 7 .4 ; I.O .P . 1 0 .6 . W e m a ya f f irm o n a n yb a sis su p p o rte d b yth e re c o rd . S e e E rie T elec o m m s. v . E ri e, 85 3 F . 2 d 1 0 8 4 , 1 0 8 9 (3d C ir . 1 9 8 8 ). T he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d nothave j ur i s di ct i on overt he debt or s ’ appea l fr om t he or der o f th e B a n k ru p tcy C o u rt. A t th e re lev a n t ti m e , B a n k ru p tcy R u le 8 0 0 2 (a ) sta ted th a t a not i ce of appea l m us tbe fi l ed w i t hi n 10 day s of the entr yof the B ankrupt cyC our t ’ s or der ( t he t i m e per i od has s i nce be en expa nded t o 14 day s ) . T he 10- dayt i m e l i m i tof B ank rupt cyR ule 8002 (a) i s m and at oryand j uri sdi ct i on al . S ee In r e U niver sal M i neral s, I n c . , 7 5 5 F . 2 d 3 0 9 , 3 1 1 - 1 2 ( 3 d C i r . 1 9 8 5 ) . T h e d e b t o r s ’ n o t i c e o f a p p e a l , f

i l e d n e a r l y a m ont h aft ert he entr yof the or deri n t hei rcas e, w as cl ear l yunt i m el y . A ccor di ngl y , t he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d nothave j ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew t he B ankrupt cyC our t ’ s or derand thus had an a l t ernat i ve bas i s t o di s m i s s t he appe al . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l s um m ar i l yaff i r m t he D istri ct C o u rt ’s ord er.