CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
IN RE: LEE H. PURDY,
Debtor,
___________________________________________

SUNSHINE HEIFERS, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
CITIZENS FIRST BANK,
Appellee.
   No. 16-6381
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green.
No. 1:15-cv-00110—Joseph H. McKinley Jr., District Judge.
Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green.
No. 12-11592—Joan A. Lloyd, Judge.
Argued: July 26, 2017
Decided and Filed: August 31, 2017
Before: COLE, Chief Judge; BATCHELDER and MOORE, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. On August 14, 2014, a panel of this court held that Citizens First Bank (“Citizens First” or “CFB”) failed to demonstrate that the “Dairy Cow Leases” it had with farmer Lee Purdy (“Debtor”) were actually security agreements in disguise. Sunshine Heifers, LLC v. Citizens First Bank (In re Purdy), 763 F.3d 513, 521 (6th Cir. 2014). The case was subsequently remanded to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Kentucky “for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” Id. On remand, the bankruptcy court determined that “all cattle sold at the auction in April 2014 were subject to CFB’s security interest. Therefore, the Court determines that all the proceeds of the [bankruptcy] auction, less the Trustee’s fee, the costs of care and feeding of the cattle and expenses related to the sale, are the property of CFB.” In Re Purdy, No. 12-11592(1)(12), 2015 WL 5176580, at *15 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. Sept. 2, 2015). Sunshine Heifers, LLC (“Sunshine”) appealed to the district court, which “affirm[ed] the Bankruptcy Court’s decision that ‘net sales proceeds, exclusive of all costs associated with the sale and care of the cattle sold, totaling $402,354.54 are awarded to Citizens First Bank.’” Sunshine Heifers, LLC v. Purdy, No. 1:15-cv- 00110-JHM, 2016 WL 4392815, at * 5 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 15, 2016). Sunshine now appeals the district court’s judgment and argues that the bankruptcy court deprived Sunshine of its right to a portion of the bankruptcy auction proceeds. Sunshine requests that we remand the case to the bankruptcy court and require the bankruptcy court to award to Sunshine $301,318.63 in proceeds from the bankruptcy auction. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM.