Court Opinion

ID: 9382185
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-24 21:01:52.039809+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:37.716812
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1751         Doc: 45              Filed: 03/23/2023   Pg: 1 of 2

                                                    UNPUBLISHED

                                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                                      No. 22-1751

        In re: FRED YEN MING CHU; MEIYU CHU,

                                 Debtors.
        ----------------------------------------

        FU QUAN LI,

                                Creditor - Appellant,

        FRED YEN MING CHU; MEIYU CHU,

                                Debtors - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:21-cv-02717-PX; 8:21-cv-02487-PX)

        Submitted: March 21, 2023                                             Decided: March 23, 2023

        Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: John Christopher Belcher, North Beach, Maryland, for Appellant. Raymond
        Yu, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1751      Doc: 45          Filed: 03/23/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Fu Quan Li seeks to appeal the district court’s order: (1) denying his motion for

        leave to file an interlocutory appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order reopening the

        Debtors’ bankruptcy case, and (2) vacating the bankruptcy court’s order granting the

        Debtors’ motion to avoid Li’s judicial lien and remanding to the bankruptcy court for

        further proceedings.

               With respect to the district court’s denial of leave to file an interlocutory appeal, we

        have reviewed the record on appeal and the arguments of the parties and find no reversible

        error. Accordingly, we affirm this portion of the district court’s order. Li v. Chu, Nos.

        8:21-cv-02717-PX; 8:21-cv-02487-PX (D. Md. June 13, 2022).

               We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Li’s appeal from the portion of the district court’s

        order vacating the bankruptcy court’s decision and remanding for further proceedings.

        This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain

        interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

        Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Li seeks to appeal

        is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we

        dismiss this portion of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny the motion for leave to

        file a supplemental appendix, and we dispense with oral argument because the facts and

        legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument

        would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                AFFIRMED IN PART,
                                                                                DISMISSED IN PART

                                                      2