YAN SUI V. RICHARD MARSHACK, No. 15-56130 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 18 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT YAN SUI; PEI-YU YANG, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 15-56130 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. 8:15-cv-00059-JAK-AJW v. MEMORANDUM* RICHARD ALAN MARSHACK, an individual; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 8, 2017** Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Yan Sui and Pei-Yu Yang appeal pro se from the district court’s order dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims against, among others, a bankruptcy judge and the chapter 7 trustee representing Sui’s bankruptcy estate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review * 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). for abuse of discretion a court’s imposition of sanctions under its inherent power. Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 55 (1991). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing terminating sanctions under its “inherent equitable powers to dismiss actions for … abusive litigation practices.” Televideo Sys. Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 916 (9th Cir. 1987). We reject as without merit plaintiffs’ contentions that the district court demonstrated bias. Appellants’ request for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 12) is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 15-56130
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
