John Howard, Sr. v. Starsha Sewell

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:14-cv-02205-DKC. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999481750]. Mailed to: Appellant. [14-1766]

Appeal: 14-1766

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/25/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1766

JOHN HOWARD, SR.,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
STARSHA SEWELL,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District
Judge. (8:14-cv-02205-DKC)

Submitted:

November 14, 2014

Decided:

November 25, 2014

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Starsha Sewell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1766

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/25/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Starsha

Sewell

appeals

the

district

court

remanding

this removed action to state court for lack of jurisdiction.
order

remanding

a

case

to

state

court

is

generally

An
not

reviewable on appeal or otherwise.

28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012).

The

the

Supreme

Court

has

limited

scope

of

§ 1447(d),

prohibiting appellate review of remand orders based on a defect
in the removal procedure or lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 711-12 (1996);
see 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (2012).
on

lack

of

dispute.

subject

matter

Accordingly,

jurisdiction.

we

In this case, remand was based

jurisdiction
dismiss

over

the

a

appeal

child
for

custody
lack

of

We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED

2