Summary
affirming dismissal order because pro se debtor failed to assert in his opening brief any argument for how the BAP or the bankruptcy court erred
Summary of this case from Mesi v. Soliel Ass'n Mgmt. (In re Mesi)Opinion
No. 14-60078
10-05-2016
In re: MICHAEL T. MEEHAN, Debtor. MICHAEL T. MEEHAN, Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC; WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, As trustee for Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-3, Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
BAP No. 13-1571 MEMORANDUM Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Dunn, Taylor, and Spraker, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Michael T. Meehan appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") order affirming the bankruptcy court's order dismissing for lack standing Meehan's adversary proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1). We affirm.
In his opening brief, Meehan fails to address how the BAP or the bankruptcy court erred in either ruling. As a result, Meehan has waived his appeal of the dismissal order. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived."); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) ("We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim . . . .").
AFFIRMED.