See Fed. Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 generally governing citation of judicial decisions issued on or after Jan. 1, 2007. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.
This Case has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. See the Supreme Court Bulletin for more information.
United States Court of Appeals,
In the Matter of Vincent TORRES, Debtor,
Vincent Torres, Appellant,
The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, Appellee.
No. 13–56066. | Submitted March 10, 2015.* | Filed March 24, 2015.
Attorneys and Law Firms
*650 Vincent Torres, Solvang, CA, pro se.
Melissa J. Fassett, Price, Postel & Parma LLP, Santa Barbara, CA, for Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:12–cv–04513–MWF.
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Vincent Torres appeals pro se from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order denying his request for sanctions against the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1). We review independently the bankruptcy court's decision without deference to the district court's determinations. Cossu v. Jefferson Pilot Sec. Corp. (In re Cossu ), 410 F.3d 591, 595 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Torres's motion for sanctions after concluding that the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians did not act in bad faith by filing a proof of claim in Torres's bankruptcy proceedings. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 55, 111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27 (1991) (standard of review); Knupfer v. Lindblade (In re Dyer ), 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir.2003) (for a court to use its inherent sanctioning power, there must be an *651 explicit finding of bad faith or willful misconduct).