Epstein Secrets

decision of the bankruptcy court. Appellee trustee moved to dismiss the appeal for failure to prosecute under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a). Of the six Poulis factors. five weighed in favor of dismissal and one weighed against dismissal. The court took into account the possibility that appellants counsel h

istrict Court is empowered to dismiss an appeal for failure to prosecute or otherwise follow the procedures set out in the Bankruptcy Rules." In re Richardson Industrial Contractors, Inc., 189 Fed. Appx. 93, at *96 (3d Cir. 2006). Before such a dismissal occurs, however, a district court must consider six factors outlined in Poulis v

Page 8 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93633, * 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3d Cir. 1984) [hereinafter Poulis]. In Poulis, the Third Circuit stated that a district court rill must balance the following factors: 1) the extent of the party's personal responsi

order to dismiss a complaint' they must all be considered") (quoting Mindek v. Rigatti, 964 F.2d 1369, 1373 (3d Cir. 1992)). It ANALYSIS In In re Richardson Industrial Contractors, Inc., 189 Fed. Appx. 93 (3d Cir. 2006), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit addressed [* 6] the relevant factors that a district co

rs, Inc., 189 Fed. Appx. 93, at *96 (3d Cir. 2006). Before such a dismissal occurs, however, a district court must consider six factors outlined in Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., For internal use only CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e) DB-SDNY-0053285 CONFIDENTIAL SDNY_GM_001

istrict Court is empowered to dismiss an appeal for failure to prosecute or otherwise follow the procedures set out in the Bankruptcy Rules." In re Richardson Industrial Contractors, Inc., 189 Fed. Appx. 93, at *96 (3d Cir. 2006). Before such a dismissal occurs, however, a district court must consider six factors outlined in Poulis v