In re: STUDIO 2000 USA, INC., a Corporation, Debtor, Studio 2000 USA, Inc., Appellant, v. United States Trustee; Timea Terestyak, Appellees; In re: Studio 2000 USA, Inc., Debtor, Studio 2000 USA, Inc.; Albert M. Kun, Esq., Appellants, v. United States Trustee; Timea Terestyak, Appellees

In re: STUDIO 2000 USA, INC., a Corporation, Debtor, Studio 2000 USA, Inc., Appellant, v. United States Trustee; Timea Terestyak, Appellees. In re: Studio 2000 USA, Inc., Debtor, Studio 2000 USA, Inc.; Albert M. Kun, Esq., Appellants, v. United States Trustee; Timea Terestyak, Appellees. No. 03-57221, 04-15423. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 2005. Decided Aug. 22, 2005. Albert Miklos Kun Esq., Law Office of Albert M. Kun, San Francisco, CA, for Appellant. Edward G. Myrtle, Esq., Office of the U.S. Trustee, Lawrence D. Murray, Esq., Murray & Associates, San Francisco, CA, for Appellees. Before: PREGERSON, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). [MAJORITY] MEMORANDUM Appellants Studio 2000 USA Inc. (“Studio”) and Studio’s bankruptcy counsel, Albert Kun, appeal the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) decisions affirming the bankruptcy court, which dismissed Studio’s Chapter 11 case and imposed sanctions on Kun. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). After a careful review of the record and briefs, we affirm for the reasons stated in the well-reasoned BAP opinions. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.