In the Matter of: LESLIE P. MARKS v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In the Matter of: LESLIE P. MARKS,
Debtor.
LESLIE P. MARKS,
Appellant,
v.
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
Appellee.
No. 10-16811
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-01148-WHA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 25, 2011**
Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Leslie P. Marks appeals pro se from the district court’s order concerning
various orders of the bankruptcy court, including its order dismissing her Chapter
FILED
NOV 02 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-16811 2
13 bankruptcy petition. 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 district court properly concluded that Marks’s notice of appeal from the
bankruptcy court orders was untimely. See Greene v. United States (In re Souza),
795 F.2d 855, 857 (9th Cir. 1986) (the notice of appeal from a bankruptcy court
decision must be filed within the time provided by Bankruptcy Rule 8002).
Marks’s contention that the district court and bankruptcy court judges were
biased is unsupported by the record. See Focus Media, Inc. v. NBC, (In re Focus
Media), 378 F.3d 916, 929-30 (9th Cir. 2004) (judicial rulings alone rarely
evidence bias).
Marks’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Marks’s motion to file a supplemental brief is granted.
Marks’s request for judicial notice is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --