You're viewing Docket Item 8 from the case Oxholm-Dababneh. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




4:13-cv-12075-TGB-MKM Doc # 8 Filed 07/30/13 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 749

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN





In re AVELINA MONICA
OXHOLM-DABABNEH,




AVELINA MONICA

OXHOLM-DABABNEH,

Debtor.






Appellant,

v.






PB REIT, INC.,





Appellee.

































/









Case No. 13-12075
HON. TERRENCE G. BERG

Bankruptcy No. 12-31088
HON. DANIEL OPPERMAN





/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

This action is an appeal from the Bankruptcy Court. After filing a notice of

appeal, Appellant Avelina Monica Oxholm-Dababneh has filed nothing else: no

opening brief, no response to Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal (Dkt. 5), and no

response to this Court’s July 22, 2013 Order to Show Cause why Appellee’s Motion

to Dismiss the Appeal should not be granted (Dkt. 7).

Under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8001(a), when an appellant

files a notice of appeal but thereafter fails to take any other action, the district court

has discretion to take any action it deems appropriate, including dismissing the

appeal. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a) (“An appellant's failure to take any step other

than timely filing a notice of appeal does not affect the validity of the appeal, but is

ground only for such action as the district court or bankruptcy appellate panel

4:13-cv-12075-TGB-MKM Doc # 8 Filed 07/30/13 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 750

deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of the appeal.”); see also In re

Creditors Services Corp., 182 F.3d 916 (Table), 1999 WL 519296 (6th Cir. July 15,

1999) (noting the “court will reverse a dismissal for negligence, indifference, or bad

faith only for an abuse of discretion”) (citing In re Winner Corp., 632 F.2d 658, 661

(6th Cir.1980)).

Based on the record before the Court, it is clear that Appellant is indifferent

to the outcome of this appeal. The Court has already ordered Appellant to show

cause, if such cause exists, why the appeal should not be dismissed, but Appellant

has further demonstrated her indifference by making no response to the Court’s

Order.

Accordingly, in light of Appellant’s apparent indifference, Appellee’s Motion

to Dismiss Appeal (Dkt. 5) is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 30, 2013

s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE





Certificate of Service





I hereby certify that this Order was electronically submitted on July 30,

2013, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to all parties.





s/A. Chubb

Case Manager







 

2