In re: Mary Louise Walker, CC-16-1011-TaKuKi

Debtor Mary Louise Walker filed a skeletal Chapter 13 petition pro se and was given two 14‑day notices to file missing case‑initiation documents; the notices warned the case would be dismissed for noncompliance.
Walker failed to file five required documents within 14 days and the bankruptcy court dismissed her Chapter 13 case.
Walker filed a pro se “Motion to Reinstate Dismissed Case” whose text largely duplicated another debtor’s filing in a different case and included allegations unrelated to the dismissal (and referenced an adversary proceeding that had not been filed by her).
The bankruptcy court denied the Motion to Reinstate at a hearing and entered a written order; Walker appealed the denial but did not provide a transcript of the hearing despite the Panel’s directive.
Walker’s appellate briefs did not meaningfully contest the original dismissal or identify Rule 59(e) grounds for reconsideration; she also attempted to supplement the record with unrelated documents, which the Panel rejected.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the bankruptcy court abused its discretion in denying Walker’s motion to reinstate (reconsider dismissal)	Walker sought reinstatement, alleging time restraints, discovery needs, lender impropriety, and referenced other litigation; she argued generally for relief from dismissal	Trustee argued the motion was facially irrelevant, failed to state Rule 59(e) grounds, and the record lacked a transcript of the hearing	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; appellant failed to supply transcript, did not invoke Rule 59(e) grounds, and waived challenges to dismissal
Whether the dismissal itself was improper	Walker asserted the dismissal was premature or erroneous (generally)	Trustee maintained Walker failed to cure deficiencies as warned and made no showing of error	Not addressed on merits; any challenge to the dismissal was waived for failing to brief or support the issue on appeal

N. Alaska Envtl. Ctr. v. Lujan, 961 F.2d 886 (9th Cir. 1992) (standard of review for denial of reconsideration)
TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. Edriver Inc., 653 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2011) (abuse of discretion standard and review principles)
United States v. Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247 (9th Cir. 2009) (defining abuse of discretion and review scope)
Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 2009) (issues not raised and argued in opening brief are waived)
Kyle v. Dye (In re Kyle), 317 B.R. 390 (9th Cir. BAP 2004) (failure to provide hearing transcript permits summary affirmance)
Gionis v. Wayne (In re Gionis), 170 B.R. 675 (9th Cir. BAP 1994) (appellate assumptions when transcript not provided)
Fadel v. DCB United LLC (In re Fadel), 492 B.R. 1 (9th Cir. BAP 2013) (grounds for reconsideration under Civil Rule 59(e))