Opinion ID: 623709
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The District Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction

Text: At the time Statek appealed to the district court, a party seeking review of a bankruptcy judge’s decision had ten days from “the date of the entry of the judgment, order, or decree” to file a notice of appeal to a district court or bankruptcy appellate panel. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a) 7 (2009).5 The ten-day deadline is tolled if one of a specified list of motions is filed in the bankruptcy court. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(b) (2009). But once the time to appeal runs, a district court or bankruptcy appellate panel has no jurisdiction to consider an untimely appeal. “[T]he time limit contained in Rule 8002(a) is jurisdictional, and . . . in the absence of a timely notice of appeal in the district court, the district court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal, regardless of whether the appellant can demonstrate ‘excusable neglect.’” Siemon v. Emigrant Sav. Bank (In re Siemon), 421 F.3d 167, 169 (2d Cir. 2005). Appellee Plan Administrator challenges the timeliness of Statek’s appeal to the district court from the bankruptcy court’s initial order disallowing the claim.6 (Appellee’s Br. 2 n.2.). Its argument is based on the following timeline: 7/21/2009 Bankruptcy court order disallowing Statek’s claim. 7/31/2009 Statek’s motion for reconsideration filed. 9/8/2009 Bankruptcy court denies motion for reconsideration. 9/16/2009 Statek appeals both orders to the district court. 5 Effective December 1, 2009, Rule 8002 now provides a fourteen-day window to file a notice of appeal. 6 We may (and indeed must) consider the timeliness of the notice of appeal, even though the Plan Administrator apparently failed to present the issue to the district court. Rule 8002 is jurisdictional. See In re Siemon, 421 F.3d at 169. A circuit court has an “independent obligation to consider the presence or absence of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte.” Walters v. Indus. & Commercial Bank of China, Ltd., 651 F.3d 280, 287 (2d Cir. 2011) (quotation marks omitted). “For that reason, every federal appellate court has a special obligation to satisfy itself not only of its own jurisdiction, but also that of the lower courts in a cause under review . . . .” Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S. 534, 541 (1986) (quotation marks omitted). “And if the record discloses that the lower court was without jurisdiction this court will notice the defect, although the parties make no contention concerning it.” Id. “When the lower federal court lacks jurisdiction, we have jurisdiction on appeal, not of the merits but merely for the purpose of correcting the error of the lower court in entertaining the suit.” Id. (alterations omitted). 8 Accordingly, regardless of whether the motion for reconsideration tolled the time to appeal the bankruptcy court’s initial order, Statek’s appeal of that order disallowing its claim was untimely. Its appeal of the denial of the motion for reconsideration, however, was timely. The district court’s review—and, by extension, our review as well—is thus limited to the bankruptcy court’s denial of Statek’s motion to reconsider.