Goldenberg v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (In Re Papazov)
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Trustee Elizabeth Goldenberg appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s denial of her motion to reopen debtor Garegin Pa-pazov’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. We affirm.
Appellant lacks Article III standing because she has not suffered an injury in fact. See Sprint Commc’ns Co. v. APCC Serv., Inc., 554 U.S. 269, 273 , 128 S.Ct. 2531 , 171 L.Ed.2d 424 (2008). Appellant had no legal relationship with Papazov, was not negatively affected by Papazov’s bankruptcy case, and suffered no perceivable injury in fact. Even assuming that Appellant had standing, we would affirm.
Appellant claims she is a party in interest capable of reopening Papazov’s bankruptcy case under 11 U.S.C. § 350 (b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5010 (“Bankruptcy Rule 5010”). Appellant’s argument fails on two alternative grounds.
First, Appellant lacked standing to reopen Papazov’s bankruptcy case as a party in interest. Bankruptcy Rule 5010 allows a debtor or other party in interest to reopen a bankruptcy case under § 350(b), but the provision does not define party in interest. Fed. R. Bankr.P. 5010; 11 U.S.C. § 350 (b) (2015). We look instead to 11 U.S.C. § 1109 (b), which identifies a party…