MEMORANDUM **
Robert C. Konop appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining Hawaiian Airlines’ Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the district court’s determinations. Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand), 375 F.3d 854, 857 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not err in determining that it had jurisdiction to decide the Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. See Rains v. Flinn (In re Rains), 428 F.3d 893, 904 (9th Cir.2005) (bankruptcy court retains jurisdiction as long as it does not expand or alter the prior order that is on appeal).
Further, the bankruptcy court did not err in determining that James Gardner was a “user” under the Stored Communi*243cations Act (“SCA”), who authorized James Davis to access Konop’s website. See 18 U.S.C. § 2510(13). Because liability is not triggered by “conduct authorized” by a “user” under the SCA, the bankruptcy court did not err by disallowing damages alleged in Claim No. 72 based on Davis’s access to Konop’s website using Gardner’s password. See 18 U.S.C. § 2701(c)(2).
Konop’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Konop’s request for judicial notice is denied.
AFFIRMED.