In re: WESTWOOD PLAZA NORTH, a California general partnership v. Irsfeld, Irsfeld & Younger, Llp

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: WESTWOOD PLAZA NORTH, a
California general partnership,
Debtor.
------------------------------
SHMUEL ERDE,
Appellant,
v.
IRSFELD, IRSFELD & YOUNGER, LLP,
Appellee.
No. 21-60056
BAP No. 21-1046
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Gan, Heston, and Lafferty III, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
Submitted December 8, 2022**
Before: WALLACE, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Shmuel Erde appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s decision
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
DEC 15 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-60056
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying Erde’s third motion for
reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de
novo the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law and for clear error its findings of
fact. Decker v. Tramiel (In re JTS Corp.), 617 F.3d 1102, 1109 (9th Cir. 2010).
We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by denying Erde’s third
motion for reconsideration of the order denying Erde’s motion to vacate the
dismissal of Westwood Plaza North’s bankruptcy case because Erde failed to
demonstrate any basis for relief. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024 (making Fed. R. Civ.
P. 60 applicable to bankruptcy cases); Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v.
ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth standard of
review and grounds for relief under Rule 60(b)).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --