In Re: Larry and Nancy Tevis

Filing 18

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 9/3/09 RE 1 ORDERING that the appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and the Clerk of the Court shall close this case. CASE CLOSED. (Duong, D)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Appellees. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY TEVIS and NANCY TEVIS, Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, DANIEL EGAN, LAW OFFICES OF PAUL CASS, JAMIE ERRECART, HANSEN, CULHANE, KOHLS, JONES & SOMMER LLP, LAW OFFICES OF PETER GALGANI, AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY, MICHAEL BURKHART, OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRUSTEE,

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

2:08-cv-01787-GEB ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL*

This is an appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's July 28, 2008 "Order on pro se Plaintiffs' ex parte application for an extension of time to file opposition." (Notice of Appeal 1:20-23.) Rule 8009 of

the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure provides that an appellant "shall serve and file a brief within 15 days after entry of the appeal on the docket. . . ." Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8009(a)(1). Appellants filed

argument.

This matter is deemed suitable for decision without oral E.D. Cal. R. 78-230(h). 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

their Notice of Appeal with this Court on August 1, 2008, Appellants' motion to proceed in forma pauperis was granted on March 17, 2009, and the appeal was docketed on March 17, 2009. (Docket 1, 15, 16.) Also

on March 17, 2009, in accordance with Rule 8009 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, the Clerk of Court sent notice to Appellants informing them their brief shall be served and filed within 15 days of the docketing of the appeal. (Docket 17.) Appellant has failed to

file an appellate brief and has made no further communications with the Court to date. Federal Rule of Bankruptcy 8001 provides that the

Court may, in its discretion, dismiss an appeal where the appellant fails to take steps beyond the filing of a notice of appeal to prosecute his appeal. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a). Appellants have

responded in a timely fashion to other communications from this court, including filing an application to proceed in forma pauperis in response to an order. This Court has considered the impact of the

dismissal and available alternatives, and determines that Appellants were at least negligent, if not completely indifferent, in not filing their Opening Brief. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed with

prejudice and the Clerk of the Court shall close this case. Dated: September 3, 2009

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge

2