Robert Konop v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., No. 09-16079 (9th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In the Matter of: HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., Chapter 11 bankruptcy, No. 09-16079 D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00012-HG-LEK Debtor. MEMORANDUM * ROBERT C. KONOP, Appellant, v. HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., a Hawaii Corporation, Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Helen Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Konop s motion to have oral argument held in Pasadena, California, is denied. Robert C. Konop appeals pro se from the district court s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court s order sustaining Hawaiian Airlines Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §158(d). We review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the district court s determinations. Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand), 375 F.3d 854, 857 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. The bankruptcy court did not err in determining that it had jurisdiction to decide the Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. See Rains v. Flinn (In re Rains), 428 F.3d 893, 904 (9th Cir. 2005) (bankruptcy court retains jurisdiction as long as it does not expand or alter the prior order that is on appeal). Further, the bankruptcy court did not err in determining that James Gardner was a user under the Stored Communications Act ( SCA ), who authorized James Davis to access Konop s website. See 18 U.S.C. § 2510(13). Because liability is not triggered by conduct authorized by a user under the SCA, the bankruptcy court did not err by disallowing damages alleged in Claim No. 72 based on Davis s access to Konop s website using Gardner s password. See 18 U.S.C. § 2701(c)(2). Konop s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. Konop s request for judicial notice is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 09-16079
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.
