⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

We hear oral argument before the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit in the matter of In re Pearlman. The case involves a dispute between a pro se creditor appellant and a bankruptcy debtor over whether certain personal property can be exempted from the bankruptcy estate. The legal issue turns on Section 362(h) of the Bankruptcy Code, which addresses when property subject to a security interest may be removed from the estate if the debtor fails to timely file a statement of intention. The creditor argues that once property is removed from the estate under Section 362(h), the bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction to allow the debtor to claim exemptions in that property. The debtor's position, upheld by the bankruptcy court below, is that the exemptions are valid regardless of whether the property technically left the estate, because the debtor retained ownership. The case presents a narrow but important question of statutory interpretation with practical consequences for creditors holding security interests in personal property during Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings. The panel consists of Judges Gan, Corbit, and Niemann.

In re Pearlman (No. 26-1051) — United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit, argued July 16, 2026.