Pernack v. Federal National Mortgage Association
ORDER DISMISSING CASE; the appeal is dismissed; the Clerk is directed to terminate this action. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 5/23/13. (REW)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Susan Kay Pernack,
No. CV12-2540 PHX DGC
BK No.: 2:12-bk-13331-CGC
BAP No. AZ-12-1543
Federal National Mortgage Association, et
Before the Court is Appellee’s motion to dismiss for failure to fulfill procedural
requirements and mootness. Doc. 6. Appellant failed to respond to the motion to
dismiss. Only after this Court issued an order warning Appellant that the Court would
summarily grant Appellee’s motion (Doc. 8) did Appellant file a notice objecting to the
motion to dismiss (Doc. 9). The notice states: “I Susan Pernack am objecting to
dismissal in this case. I urge court for time to retain council.” Doc. 10. This, of course,
is not an effective response to a motion to dismiss.
Since filing her notice of appeal on October 25, 2012, Appellant has not taken any
action to comply with Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8006. The bankruptcy
court notified Appellant that she had fourteen days from the filing of the notice of appeal
to file a statement of issues and designation of record (Doc. 1), and the Clerk of this
Court warned Appellant that failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy
Procedure and the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Appeal Procedure may result in dismissal
(Doc. 2). In the seven months since she filed her notice of appeal, Appellant has taken no
action to prosecute the appeal. She has filed no statement of issues, designated no
portion of the record, failed to file a substantive response to the motion to dismiss, and
failed to file any other document. Her brief response to the motion to dismiss states that
she seeks time to find counsel, but seven months is more than enough time to complete
such a task. For all of these reasons, the Court will grant Appellee’s motion to dismiss.
See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a) (“An appellant’s failure to take any step other than timely
filing a notice of appeal does not affect the validity of the appeal, but is ground only for
such action as the district court . . . deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of
the appeal.”); see also In re Gelso Investments V, LLC, 127 Fed. Appx. 916, 917 (9th Cir.
2005) (“the district court properly dismissed with prejudice [pro se appellant]’s
bankruptcy appeal for failure to prosecute because, eleven months after filing his notice
of appeal, with sufficient opportunities to comply despite his incarceration [pro se
appellant] still had not filed the requisite documents.”).
IT IS ORDERED:
The appeal is dismissed.
The Clerk is directed to terminate this action.
Dated this 23rd day of May, 2013.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?