In Re Sandish Mann and Jaspreet Mann, Debtor, Jonathan E. Tesar, Movant-Appellee v. Harjit Bhambra and Lakbhir Bhambra

79 F.3d 1153 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re Sandish MANN and Jaspreet Mann, Debtor, Jonathan E. TESAR, Movant-Appellee, v. Harjit BHAMBRA and Lakbhir Bhambra, Respondents-Appellants. No. 94-17141. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 12, 1996. * Decided March 18, 1996. Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Harjit and Lakbhir Bhambra appeal pro se the district court's affirmance of the bankruptcy court's order holding that, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362 (h), the Bhambras willfully violated the automatic stay entered in connection with the bankruptcy proceeding of debtors Sandish and Jaspreet Mann. The bankruptcy court imposed $25,000 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages against the Bhambras. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we affirm. 3 Because we are in as good a position as the district court to examine the bankruptcy court's…