
    In re Ramona G. FONTAINE, Debtor. Ramona G. Fontaine and Cirilo G. Reyes, Appellants, v. Robert L. Conn; et al., Appellees. In re Ramona G. Fontaine, Debtor. Ramona G. Fontaine and Cirilo G. Reyes, Appellants, v. Robert L. Conn; et al., Appellees.
    Nos. 10-60050, 10-60054.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 17, 2012.
    
    Filed April 23, 2012.
    Ramona G. Fontaine, Sherman Oaks, CA, pro se.
    Cirilo G. Reyes, Sherman Oaks, CA, pro se.
    Robert Conn, Newport Beach, CA, pro se.
    Marcus Arthur Fontaine, Sherman Oaks, CA, pro se.
    James Alexander Dumas, Jr., Esquire, Senior, Dumas & Associates, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellees.
    Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ramona G. Fontaine, a Chapter 7 debt- or, and her husband, Cirilo G. Reyes, (“appellants”) appeal pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment for appellee Robert L. Conn in an adversary proceeding concerning ownership of real property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo decisions of the BAP, and the bankruptcy court’s ruling on summary judgment. Arrow Elecs., Inc. v. Howard Justus (In re Kaypro), 218 F.3d 1070, 1073 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court properly granted summary judgment for Conn because Conn was the fee simple owner of the property located at 3986 Astaire Avenue, Culver City, California, as of March 12, 2008. See Gaughan v. Edward Dittlof Revocable Trust (In re Costas), 555 F.3d 790, 793 (9th Cir.2009) (debtor’s and bankruptcy estate’s property rights are governed by state law); see also Cal. Civ.Code § 1214 (rendering an unrecorded conveyance void as against any judgment affecting the title, unless the conveyance was duly recorded before the record of notice of action); cf. Hurst Concrete Prods., Inc. v. Lane (In re Lane), 980 F.2d 601, 604 (9th Cir.1992) (under California law, a judgment affecting the title or right of possession of property supports a lis pen-dens). Accordingly, the bankruptcy court also properly determined that Fontaine had no ownership interest in the property which would allow for a homestead exemption in her bankruptcy case. See Cal. Civ.Code § 1214; see also Spirtos v. Moreno (In re Spirtos), 992 F.2d 1004, 1007 (9th Cir.1993) (only property of the estate is subject to exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522); 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1) (“property of the estate” includes all legal and equitable interests that the debtor has in property as of the commencement of the bankruptcy).

Appellants’ motion for a stay of the bankruptcy proceedings pending appeal is denied as moot.

Appellants’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     