Thomas
Thomas v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*768 MEMORANDUM **
Appellant Shari Thomas challenges the district court’s dismissal of her complaint with leave to amend under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We dismiss the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
We review a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal de novo, essentially looking through the district court’s findings to the underlying decision of the bankruptcy court. In re Pomona Valley Medical Group, Inc., 476 F.3d 665, 669 (9th Cir.2007); In re Zimmer, 313 F.3d 1220, 1222 (9th Cir.2002).
Under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), we have jurisdiction of appeals from “all final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees” entered under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (a), which confers jurisdiction on the district court to hear appeals “from final judgments, orders, and decrees” of the bankruptcy court. Because of the uniqueness of bankruptcy proceedings, there exists a more flexible, “pragmatic” approach to determining what constitutes a “final,” appealable order in bankruptcy cases. In re Mason, 709 F.2d 1313, 1317, 1318 (9th Cir.1983) (recognizing that “proceedings in a bankruptcy case are so distinct and conclusive either to the rights of individual parties or the ultimate outcome of the…