Perry v. Key Auto Recovery (In re Perry)
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Perry v. PTO (Fed. Cir. 2025)
- Perry v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2020)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Avram Moshe Perry appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying Perry’s motion to reconsider the bankruptcy court’s prior order directing that an adversary proceeding be closed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo BAP decisions, and apply the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling. Boyajian v. New Falls Corp. (In re Boyajian), 564 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Perry’s motion to reconsider its judgment because appellant failed to establish any basis for such relief. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth grounds for reconsideration).
Perry’s motion to supplement his excerpts of record is granted. Perry’s requests for judicial notice are denied as unnecessary.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.