Opinion
No. 13-60006 BAP No. 12-1186
11-04-2016
In re: MAURA SANTANA; TEODORO SANTANA, Debtors. ESPERANZA VENTUS BADA; LAW OFFICES OF ESPERANZA V. BADA, Appellants, v. NANCY K. CURRY, Chapter 13 Trustee; et al., Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Hammond, Hollowell, and Markell, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Esperanza Ventus Bada, an attorney, appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") judgment dismissing her appeal as untimely. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo. Mantz v. Cal. State Bd. of Equalization (In re Mantz), 343 F.3d 1207, 1211 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.
The BAP properly dismissed Bada's appeal on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction because Bada did not appeal from the bankruptcy court's final order within the 14 days prescribed by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1). See Slimick v. Silva (In re Slimick), 928 F.2d 304, 307 (9th Cir. 1990) (the filing of an order or judgment after the entry of a final disposition resolving the issue at bar does not constitute a second final disposition or extend the appeal period).
AFFIRMED.