out-of-time answer, the Bankruptcy Court also concluded that the trustee was entitled to a final judgment of possession for the “same reason ... expressed previously as to why the trustee was entitled to [a] preliminary order.” Transcript from hearing held 6/25/07, 16. That reason, which Buccolo contested on various grounds in his brief in the District Court (along with his arguments relating to his counsel’s culpability), appears unassailable. Nonetheless, even if the consideration of the merits of Buccolo’s claim or defense does not tip the scales for or against dismissal, it cannot be said that the District Court abused its discretion in concluding that on balance, dismissal was warranted. See Curtis T. Bedwell & Sons, Inc. v. Int’l Fidelity Ins. Co., 843 F.2d 683, 696 (3d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal pursuant
recognizing trial court should not weigh evidence holding a sentencing court is not obligated to expressly weigh on the record each of the factors set out in  3553a holding that ninemonth period not sufficient to weigh in favor of finding closedended continuity holding upward deviation reasonable where supported by proper factors even though some  3553a factors operated in defendants favor holding that not all poulis factors must weigh in favor of dismissal