In re: ARNALDO D’ALFONSO and LIBUSA D’ALFONSO v. Arnaldo D’alfonso;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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 re: ARNALDO D’ALFONSO and
LIBUSA D’ALFONSO,
Debtors,
LUISA BERISTAIN,
Appellant,
v.
ARNALDO D’ALFONSO; et al.,
Appellees.
No. 11-60046
BAP No. 11-1147
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Dunn, Kirscher, and Markell, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
Submitted August 14, 2013**
Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
FILED
AUG 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-60046 2
Luisa Beristain appeals from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”)
order dismissing her appeal as untimely under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy
Procedure 8002(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de
novo, Wiersma v. Bank of the West (In re Wiersma), 483 F.3d 933, 938 (9th Cir.
2007), and we affirm.
The BAP properly dismissed the appeal because Beristain filed her notice of
appeal more than fourteen days after entry of the bankruptcy court’s order denying
her motion for a new trial or to alter or amend a judgment. See Fed. R. Bankr. P.
8002(a) & (c) (establishing 14-day time period for filing a notice of appeal from a
bankruptcy court decision and explaining that after the 14-day time period for
filing a notice of appeal has elapsed, a bankruptcy judge may extend the time upon
written motion showing excusable neglect); In re Wiersma, 483 F.3d at 938 (“The
timely appeal requirement is jurisdictional.”); see also Keybar Invs., Inc. v. Cahn
(In re Cahn), 188 B.R. 627, 632 (9th Cir. BAP 1995) (“It is well-settled that failure
to receive notice of entry of judgment or order is not an excuse for an untimely
appeal because it is the party’s affirmative duty to monitor the dockets.”).
Beristain’s arguments about impediments to filing the notice of appeal are
unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --