FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: BOOKER THEODORE WADE, Jr., No. 15-16922
Debtor. D.C. No. 5:14-cv-05628-LHK
______________________________
BOOKER THEODORE WADE, Jr., MEMORANDUM*
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
ARLENE STEVENS,
Respondent-Appellee,
and
FRED HJELMESET; OFFICE OF THE
US TRUSTEE/SJ,
Trustees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Lucy H. Koh, District Judge, Presiding
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Submitted December 14, 2016**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Booker Theodore Wade, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing Wade’s bankruptcy appeal for failure to prosecute after Wade failed to
file his opening brief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d), 1291. We
review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s dismissal for failure to
prosecute. Moneymaker v. CoBen (In re Eisen), 31 F.3d 1447, 1451 (9th Cir.
1994). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Wade’s
bankruptcy appeal after determining that the delay caused by Wade’s failure to file
an opening brief was unreasonable and interfered with the district court’s ability to
manage its docket. See id. (“A reviewing court will give deference to the district
court to decide what is unreasonable because it is in the best position to determine
what period of delay can be endured before its docket becomes unmanageable”
(citations omitted)).
We reject as without merit Wade’s contentions that the district court
exhibited bias in dismissing his appeal for failure prosecute.
AFFIRMED.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
2 15-16922