Simantob

Simantob v. Lahijani

Good Law
155 F. App'x 298
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 21, 2005No. 04-55253; D.C. No. CV-03-03296-JFWCalifornia368 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Whereas a district court may review both interlocutory and final orders of the bankruptcy court, see 28 U.S.C. § 158 (a), the circuits courts have jurisdiction to hear only “final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees” entered by a district court or a bankruptcy appellate panel, see id. § 158(d). We dismiss this appeal without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction because the district court’s decision, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order granting in part appellee’s motion to dismiss, is not a final order. See In re Pizza of Hawaii, Inc., 761 F.2d 1374, 1378 (9th Cir.1985) (noting that interlocutory orders are not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d)). Although the finality rules in bankruptcy are more “flexible” than those under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we previously dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an appeal from a bankruptcy court order that dismissed one count of a four-count counterclaim. In re King City Transit Mix, Inc., 738 F.2d 1065 , 1066 (9th Cir.1984) (“[I]n this case even the unique nature of a bankruptcy proceeding does not warrant a departure from final order jurisprudence developed in the context of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .”). We similarly dismiss the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.