Thomas Hantges v. Michael Carmel

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 18 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THOMAS HANTGES, No. 09-17247 Debtor - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00990-KJD- GWF v. MICHAEL W. CARMEL, Chapter 11 MEMORANDUM * Trustee, Trustee - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 8, 2011 ** Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Thomas Hantges appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order requiring the turnover of bankruptcy estate property in his Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). § 158(d). We review for clear error whether an appellant is a “person aggrieved.” Duckor Spradling & Metzger v. Baum Trust (In re P.R.T.C., Inc.), 177 F.3d 774, 777 (9th Cir. 1999). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed the appeal for lack of standing because, by his own admission, Hantges was not “directly and adversely affected pecuniarily” by the bankruptcy court’s order and hence did not qualify as a “person aggrieved.” Id. Hantges’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 09-17247