Case Name: PLAN B DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Appellant, v. AUBURN ACE HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-14
Citations: 387 F. App'x 746
Docket Number: No. 09-35953
Parties: PLAN B DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Appellant, v. AUBURN ACE HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee.
Judges: Before: CALLAHAN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and BENITEZ, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Bankruptcy Reporter
Volume: 439
Pages: 746–747

Head Matter:
PLAN B DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Appellant, v. AUBURN ACE HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee.
No. 09-35953.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 11, 2010.
Filed July 14, 2010.
Douglas Elston, Law Offices of Douglas W. Elston, Snohomish, WA, for Appellant.
Christine M. Tobin, Bankruptcy Counsel, Bush, Strout & Kornfeld, Seattle, WA, for Appellee.
Before: CALLAHAN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and BENITEZ, District Judge.
The Honorable Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The parties do not dispute that the debt- or's primary asset was sold during the bankruptcy process. Nor do they dispute that Plan B failed to obtain a stay of the proceedings while this appeal was pending. Therefore, we conclude that the transfer of that asset precludes us from providing meaningful relief. Trone v. Robert Farms, Inc. (In re Roberts Farm, Inc.), 652 F.2d 793, 797 (9th Cir.1981).
Plan B's reliance on Popp v. Zimmerman (In re Popp), 323 B.R. 260 (9th Cir. BAP 2005) is misplaced, as in that case the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel could still provide relief based on a lien that remained on the property in that suit. Id. at 271-72. No such lien exists in this case.
The appeal is DISMISSED as moot.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid-