In re: PETER THOMAS McCARTHY v. AMY L. GOLDMAN, Esq., Chapter 7 Trustee

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: PETER THOMAS McCARTHY,
Debtor,
PETER THOMAS McCARTHY,
Appellant,
v.
AMY L. GOLDMAN, Esq., Chapter 7
Trustee,
Appellee,
and
NATURE’S WING FIN DESIGN, LLC,
Appellee-Intervenor.
No. 10-56743
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00936-RGK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding
FILED
OCT 17 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, McCarthy’s
request for oral argument is denied.
10-56743 2
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Peter Thomas McCarthy appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing his interlocutory appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order denying his
motion to confirm that certain contractual rights were excluded from the estate.
We review de novo our own jurisdiction and whether a bankruptcy court’s decision
is final under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot
Springs (In re City of Desert Hot Springs), 339 F.3d 782, 787 (9th Cir. 2003). We
dismiss.
The bankruptcy court’s order denying McCarthy’s “motion to confirm [that]
rejected executory contracts and rights thereunder were not estate property” is not a
final decision over which we have appellate jurisdiction. See United States v.
Fowler (In re Fowler), 394 F.3d 1208, 1211 (9th Cir. 2005) (discussing “pragmatic
approach to determining finality” of bankruptcy court orders and setting forth tests
to determine finality); see also Rains v. Flinn (In re Rains), 428 F.3d 893, 901 (9th
Cir. 2005) (explaining that this court has jurisdiction only when both the
bankruptcy court order and the decision of the district court acting in its

-- 2 of 3 --

10-56743 3
bankruptcy appellate capacity are final orders).
Appellee-Intervenor’s request for judicial notice is denied as moot.
DISMISSED.

-- 3 of 3 --