In Re: Craig Clinton Rominger and Heidi Kay Rominger

Docket 2:25-cv-02143

Filed
2025-10-29
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

other dismissal

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=81 OFFICE=2 DOCKET=2502143 FILEDATE=10/29/2025 DISP=14, PROCPROG=10, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 In Re: CRAIG CLINTON ROMINGER and CASE NO. 2:25-cv-02143-LK 11 HEIDI KAY ROMINGER ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 12 EXTEND TIME TO FILE STATEMENT OF ISSUES AND 13 DESIGNATION OF RECORD ON APPEAL 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on Craig and Heidi Rominger’s Motion to Extend Time 16 (60 Days) to File Statement of Issues and Designation of Record on Appeal. Dkt. No. 5. For the 17 reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion. 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 On October 23, 2025, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court entered a judgment and order denying 20 the Romingers’ discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(1). See Dkt. No. 5 at 2; see also Dkt. No. 1-1 21 at 31–32. The Romingers have appealed that judgment to this Court. 22 On November 10, 2025, the Romingers filed this motion for a 60-day extension of time to 23 file their Statement of Issues on Appeal and Designation of Record. Dkt. No. 5 at 1. Now that the 24 1 Romingers have paid the appeal filing fee, Dkt. No. 10, this motion is ripe for the Court’s 2 consideration. 3 II. DISCUSSION 4 The Romingers contend that the Court may extend the deadlines for good cause under 5 Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009(c) and 8018(b). Dkt. No. 5 at 3. They state that they 6 “are in the process of obtaining certified transcripts and certain exhibits from the trial proceedings, 7 but these remain outstanding as of [their motion].” Id. at 2. They also state that they are 8 “transitioning to new appellate counsel, who requires adequate time to review the record, 9 coordinate with the bankruptcy clerk and court reporter, and prepare the necessary filings.” Id. 10 Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8018(b) requires appellants to serve and file an 11 appendix that includes, among other things, “any relevant transcript or portion of it.” If the 12 transcript is unavailable, the appellant may “prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings 13 from the best available means, including the appellant’s recollection.” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 14 8009(c)(1). Appellants must file their designations of the record, statement of issues, and either a 15 copy of their request for the transcript to the court reporter or a statement that they are not ordering 16 the transcript “within 14 days after [] the notice of appeal as of right has become effective under 17 Rule 8002; or an order granting leave to appeal has been entered.” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8009(a). 18 The Romingers’ motion does not state when their appeal materials were due. See generally 19 Dkt. No. 5. The Romingers are appealing the bankruptcy court’s judgment against them, which 20 was entered on October 23, 2025. Dkt. No. 1-1 at 31. They filed their notice of appeal on October 21 28, 2025, see Dkt. No. 1-2 at 1, so their notice of appeal became effective on that date. The 22 Romingers’ materials were therefore due on November 12, 2025. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8009(a) 23 (setting 14-day deadline); see also Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(a)(1) (where, as here, the last day falls 24 on a legal holiday, the “last day” extends to the next day that is not a legal holiday). Because the 1 Romingers filed this motion on November 10, 2025, Dkt. No. 5, before their deadline elapsed, the 2 Court may extend the deadline “for cause,” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(b)(1). 3 The Court finds cause to extend the deadline because the Romingers are obtaining new 4 counsel, there is no indication in the record that the extension will inconvenience the Court or other 5 parties, and the Romingers contend that they will be able to meet the extended deadline and will 6 suffer harm absent a continuance. See Dkt. No. 5 at 2; see also In re Atiyeh, BAP No. CC-25-1065- 7 LGN, 2025 WL 2837771, at *3 (9th Cir. BAP Oct. 7, 2025) (setting forth factors to review a 8 bankruptcy court’s denial of an extension under Rule 9006). Accordingly, the Court extends the 9 deadline by 60 days to January 12, 2026. 10 III. CONCLUSION 11 For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS the Romingers’ Motion to Extend 12 Time (60 Days) to File Statement of Issues and Designation of Record on Appeal, Dkt. No. 5, and 13 extends their deadline to file those materials to January 12, 2026. 14 Dated this 30th day of December, 2025. 15 A 16 Lauren King United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.