Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-116_9o6b.pdf
Page Number: 12

Cite as:  575 U. S. ____ (2015) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

tested  matters  is  “endless”  and  covers  all  sorts  of  minor 
disagreements.  10  Collier  ¶9014.01,  at  9014–3.    The 
concept of finality cannot stretch to cover, for example, an
order  resolving  a  disputed  request  for  an  extension  of
time. 

At  other  points,  the  Solicitor  General  appears  to  argue
that  because  one  possible  resolution  of  this  particular
contested matter (confirmation) is final, the other (denial) 
must be as well.  But this argument begs the question.  It 
simply assumes that confirmation is appealable because it 
resolves  a  contested  matter,  and  that  therefore  anything 
else  that  resolves  the  contested  matter  must  also  be  ap­
pealable.  But  one  can  just  as  easily  contend  that  confir­
mation  is  appealable  because  it  resolves  the  entire  plan
consideration  process,  and  that  therefore  the  entire  pro­
cess  is  the  “proceeding.”    A  decision  that  does  not  resolve 
the entire plan consideration process—denial—is therefore
not appealable.

Perhaps  the  Solicitor  General’s  suggestion  is  that  a 
separately appealable “proceeding” must coincide precisely 
with  a  particular  “adversary  proceeding”  or  “contested 
matter”  under  the  Bankruptcy  Rules.    He  does  not,  how­
ever,  provide  any  support  for  such  a  suggestion.    More 
broadly,  it  is  of  course  quite  common  for  the  finality  of  a 
decision  to  depend  on  which  way  the  decision  goes.    An 
order granting a motion for summary judgment is final; an 
order denying such a motion is not.

Bullard and the Solicitor General also contend that our 
rule creates an unfair asymmetry: If the bankruptcy court 
sustains  an  objection  and  denies  confirmation,  the  debtor
(always the plan proponent in Chapter 13) must go back to 
the  drafting  table  and  try  again;  but  if  the  bankruptcy 
court  overrules  an  objection  and  grants  confirmation,  a 
creditor can appeal without delay.  But any asymmetry in
this  regard  simply  reflects  the  fact  that  confirmation 
allows  the  bankruptcy  to  go  forward  and  alters  the  legal