Lee Ann Love v. Johnny Oliver Wiseman;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LEE ANN LOVE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JOHNNY OLIVER WISEMAN; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-16720
D.C. No. 5:15-cv-03884-BLF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Lee Ann Love appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming the
bankruptcy court’s orders determining Love’s secured status, and dismissing in
part Love’s adversary proceeding against the trustee and the debtors. We review
de novo our own jurisdiction and whether a bankruptcy court’s decision is final.
* 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). Love’s request for oral
argument, set forth in her opening brief, is denied.
FILED
OCT 3 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-16720
SilverSage 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.
This court lacks jurisdiction because the bankruptcy court’s orders did not
dispose of all claims against all defendants in Love’s adversary proceeding. See
Walther v. King City Transit Mix, Inc. (In re King City Transit Mix, Inc.), 738 F.2d
1065, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 1984) (bankruptcy court order dismissing one of four
counterclaims in adversary proceeding was not final); see also SS Farms, LLC v.
Sharp (In re SK Foods, L.P.), 676 F.3d 798, 801-02 (9th Cir. 2012) (district court
order affirming interlocutory bankruptcy court order is also interlocutory). Nor did
the bankruptcy court direct entry of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7054. See Walther,
738 F.2d at 1067.
Love’s request to treat this appeal as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, set
forth in her opening brief, is denied.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --