NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 24 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: ADINA I. ZAHARESCU, No. 14-55403
Debtor. D.C. No. 2:13-cv-06570-RGK
______________________________
SATISH SHETTY, MEMORANDUM*
Appellant,
v.
LSI TITLE COMPANY,
Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 9, 2017**
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges
Satish Shetty appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming the
bankruptcy court’s order dismissing claims against appellee in Shetty’s adversary
*
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).
proceeding. We review de novo our own jurisdiction and whether a bankruptcy
court’s decision is final. Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs
(In re City of Desert Hot Springs), 339 F.3d 782, 787 (9th Cir. 2003). We dismiss.
This court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because “the bankruptcy
court’s order did not dispose of all of the issues in the adversary proceeding” or
“direct entry of judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) which applies to adversary
proceedings in bankruptcy by virtue of Bankruptcy Rule 7054.” Walther v. King
City Transit Mix, Inc. (In re King City Transit Mix, Inc.), 738 F.2d 1065, 1066-67
(9th Cir. 1984) (appellate jurisdiction in bankruptcy extends only to matters
appealable to the district court as of right).
Appellee’s motion to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 12) is denied as
unnecessary.
DISMISSED.
2 14-55403
Adina Zaharescu V.
Combined Opinion