Chittranjan Thakkar v. Holland & Knight, LLP

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 20-12905
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:19-cv-01116-SDM
Bkcy. No. 8:17-bk-03597-MGW
In re: NILHAN FINANCIAL, LLC,
Debtor.
__________________________________________________________________
CHITTRANJAN THAKKAR,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(March 17, 2021)
USCA11 Case: 20-12905 Date Filed: 03/17/2021 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, JORDAN and GRANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Chittranjan Thakkar, a member of the debtor, Nilhan Financial, LLC,
appeals pro se an order affirming the decision of the bankruptcy court to approve a
claim for attorneys’ fees. The district court ruled that Thakkar failed to object to
the proof of claim and waived his opportunity to challenge the reasonableness of
the fees. We vacate the order and remand for the district court to dismiss Thakkar’s
appeal for lack of standing.
We are obligated sua sponte to ensure that we have jurisdiction to entertain
an appeal. Reaves v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t. of Corr., 717 F.3d 886, 905 (11th Cir.
2013). When the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a case on the merits,
we possess jurisdiction to correct the error. Boyd v. Homes of Legend, Inc., 188
F.3d 1294, 1298 (11th Cir. 1999).
The district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain Thakkar’s appeal because
he lacked standing to challenge the award of attorneys’ fees. “To have standing, a
plaintiff must show: (1) he has suffered an injury in fact that is (a) concrete and
particularized and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) the
injury is fairly traceable to conduct of the defendant; and (3) it is likely, not just
merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.” Kelly
v. Harris, 331 F.3d 817, 819–20 (11th Cir. 2003). As we decided in related
USCA11 Case: 20-12905 Date Filed: 03/17/2021 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

3
appeals, Thakkar v. Good Gateway, LLC, No. 19-14868 (11th Cir. Dec. 9, 2020);
Thakkar v. Greenspoon Marder, P.A., No. 20-11068 (11th Cir. Jan. 4, 2021);
Thakkar v. Nejame Law, P.A., No. 20-12768 (11th Cir. Feb. 11, 2021), Thakkar
lacks standing to appeal an order of the bankruptcy court that only indirectly
affects his pecuniary interest in the debtor. See Atkinson v. Ernie Haire Ford, Inc.
(In re Ernie Haire Ford, Inc.), 764 F.3d 1321, 1325 (11th Cir. 2014). As was true
in those appeals, the approval of the claim of Holland & Knight LLP for attorneys’
fees only indirectly affected Thakkar’s pecuniary interests, if at all. See Fla. Stat.
§ 605.0110(4) (“A member of a limited liability company has no interest in any
specific limited liability company property.”). No guarantee existed that Thakkar
would receive any surplus remaining even if Nilhan Financial satisfied its
obligations to its creditors. See 11 U.S.C. § 726(a). Because Thakkar lacked
standing to challenge the decision of the bankruptcy court, it follows that the
district court had no jurisdiction to entertain Thakkar’s appeal. We vacate the order
of affirmance and remand for the district court to dismiss Thakkar’s appeal for lack
of subject-matter jurisdiction.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
USCA11 Case: 20-12905 Date Filed: 03/17/2021 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --