Anibal Silva v. Riverside County Tax Collector;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANIBAL SILVA,
Appellant,
v.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TAX
COLLECTOR; et al.,
Appellees.
No. 20-55790
D.C. No. 5:19-cv-00571-JGB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Jesus G. Bernal, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 8, 2021**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Anibal Silva appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his
bankruptcy appeal for failure to file required documents. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d) and 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion.
Fitzsimmons v. Nolden (In re Fitzsimmons), 920 F.2d 1468, 1471 (9th Cir. 1990).
* 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
NOV 17 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-55790
We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Silva’s appeal
for failure to file all the documents required by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy
Procedure 8003, after providing additional time and multiple warnings that failure
to do so would result in dismissal. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8003(a)(2) (an appellant’s
failure to take steps to prosecute a bankruptcy appeal may be grounds for
dismissal); Greco v. Stubenberg, 859 F.2d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir. 1988) (court must
show it had sufficiently considered and exhausted alternatives to dismissal).
We reject as without merit Silva’s contention that the district judge engaged
in improper behavior.
Silva’s motion to supplement the appellate record (Docket Entry No. 11) is
granted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --