NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 26 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: ANTHONY PAUL MANRIQUE, No. 16-56799
Debtor. D.C. No. 5:16-cv-00708-DOC
______________________________
ANTHONY PAUL MANRIQUE, MEMORANDUM*
Appellant,
v.
U.S. BANK, as Trustee for Lehman XS
Trust Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2007-16N,
Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Anthony Paul Manrique appeals pro se from the district court’s order
*
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).
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying Manrique’s Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We
review de novo the district court’s decision on appeal from the bankruptcy court
and apply the same standards of review applied by the district court. Suncrest
Healthcare Ctr. LLC v. Omega Healthcare Inv’rs, Inc. (In re Raintree Healthcare
Corp.), 431 F.3d 685, 687 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by denying Manrique’s
Rule 60(b) motion because Manrique failed to demonstrate any grounds for relief.
See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024 (making Rule 60 applicable to bankruptcy cases); Sch.
Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir.
1993) (setting forth standard of review and grounds for relief under Rule 60(b)).
The district court properly determined that Manrique’s appeal of the
bankruptcy court’s underlying order was untimely because Manrique failed to file
the notice of appeal with the bankruptcy clerk within 14 days of entry of the order
as required by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1). See 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(2) (an appeal
to the BAP or district court from a bankruptcy court must be taken within the time
provided by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002); Anderson v. Mouradick (In re Mouradick),
13 F.3d 326, 327 (9th Cir. 1994) (“The provisions of Bankruptcy Rule 8002 are
jurisdictional . . . .”).
We reject as unsupported by the record Manrique’s contentions that the
2 16-56799
bankruptcy court and the district court violated due process in relation to
Manrique’s Rule 60(b) motion.
AFFIRMED.
3 16-56799