Case: 17-13018 Date Filed: 05/30/2018 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 17-13018
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:16-cv-00555-JSM
Bkcy No. 3:15-bkc-00341-PMG
In re:
REMI GUNN,
Debtor.
__________________________________________________________________
JAMES M. THOMPSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
REMI GUNN,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(May 30, 2018)
Case: 17-13018 Date Filed: 05/30/2018 Page: 2 of 3
Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, WILSON, and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
James Thompson, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of
his bankruptcy appeal. He filed an involuntary bankruptcy petition against Remi
Gunn, which the bankruptcy court dismissed. The bankruptcy court also awarded
Gunn damages, and Thompson appealed that judgment to the district court. The
district court dismissed his appeal on the grounds that Thompson failed to
prosecute the appeal, failed to state a legal basis for the appeal, and did not comply
with the bankruptcy rules. This is Thompson’s appeal.
Thompson’s brief, liberally construed, does not address any of the district
court’s reasons for dismissing his appeal, which means that he has abandoned
those issues. See Timson v. Sampson,
518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008)
(“[I]ssues not briefed on appeal by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.”). As a
result, the district court’s judgment must be affirmed. See Sapuppo v. Allstate
Floridian Ins. Co.,
739 F.3d 678, 680 (11th Cir. 2014) (“When an appellant fails to
challenge properly on appeal one of the grounds on which the district court based
its judgment, he is deemed to have abandoned any challenge of that ground, and it
follows that the judgment is due to be affirmed.”). 1
1
Even if Thompson had briefed those issues, he could not show that the district court
abused its discretion in dismissing his appeal. See Pyramid Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Speake,
531
F.2d 743, 744–46 (5th Cir. 1976). The record supports the district court’s finding that Thompson
failed to meet deadlines and violated the district court’s order directing him to file a brief
2
Case: 17-13018 Date Filed: 05/30/2018 Page: 3 of 3
AFFIRMED.
complying with the bankruptcy rules. The district court also warned Thompson that his failure to
file a proper brief could result in the dismissal of his appeal with prejudice. His behavior
justified the dismissal of his appeal. See Moon v. Newsome,
863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989)
(“While dismissal is an extraordinary remedy, dismissal upon disregard of an order, especially
where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.”).
3
