time for filing objections to discharge, see In re Gaines, 932 F.2d 729 (8th Cir.1991)—are not final. See, e.g., In re Rebear, 89 B.R. 314 (Bankr.N.D.N.Y.1988)(incidental procedural matters not immediately appealable). Those orders pose much less risk of leaving the bankruptcy estate with unwarranted assets or liabilities, or of denying creditors their lawful rights. C. The Finality of the Order in this Case Given the understanding of finality developed above, it is clear that the bankruptcy court’s denial of the motion to convert this ease from Chapter 13 to Chapter 7 is not a final order for purposes of § 158(a)(1). See Stewart v. Kutner, 656 F.2d 1107 (5th Cir. Unit A1981); In re Hebb, 53 B.R. 1003, 1005 (D.Md.1985); In re Klein/Ray Broadcasting, 100 B.R. 509 (9th Cir. BAP 1987)(<HOLDING>). An order denying a motion to convert does not
holding that a bankruptcy courts decision to convert or dismiss a chapter 11 case is a matter within its discretion holding denial of motion to convert from chapter 11 to chapter 7 is interlocutory holding that a bankruptcy court is given wide discretion to convert a chapter 11 case to chapter 7 for cause and an order for conversion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion holding that an order striking a standing trustees motion to convert a chapter 13 petition to a chapter 7 is interlocutory not final holding that a debtors right to convert his or her chapter 7 case is not absolute