In the Matter of: HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., Chapter 11 bankruptcy v. HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., a Hawaii Corporation

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Konop’s
motion to have oral argument held in Pasadena, California, is denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In the Matter of: HAWAIIAN AIRLINES,
INC., Chapter 11 bankruptcy,
Debtor.
ROBERT C. KONOP,
Appellant,
v.
HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., a Hawaii
Corporation,
Appellee.
No. 09-16079
D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00012-HG-LEK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Helen Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
FILED
OCT 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-16079 2
Robert C. Konop appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment affirming
the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining Hawaiian Airlines’ Second Supplemental
Objection to Claim No. 72. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §158(d). We
review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the
district court’s determinations. Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand), 375 F.3d 854, 857
(9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not err in determining that it had jurisdiction to
decide the Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. See Rains v. Flinn (In
re Rains), 428 F.3d 893, 904 (9th Cir. 2005) (bankruptcy court retains jurisdiction
as long as it does not expand or alter the prior order that is on appeal).
Further, the bankruptcy court did not err in determining that James Gardner
was a “user” under the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”), who authorized
James Davis to access Konop’s website. See 18 U.S.C. § 2510(13). Because
liability is not triggered by “conduct authorized” by a “user” under the SCA, the
bankruptcy court did not err by disallowing damages alleged in Claim No. 72
based on Davis’s access to Konop’s website using Gardner’s password. See
18 U.S.C. § 2701(c)(2).
Konop’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Konop’s request for judicial notice is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --