Jeffrey Fisher v. Kimmy Cathey

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999803296-2] Originating case number: 8:15-cv-01357-GJH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999930808].. [16-1458]

Appeal: 16-1458

Doc: 16

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1458

JEFFREY BARRY FISHER; DOREEN A. STROTHMAN; VIRGINIA S. INZER;
WILLIAM K. SMART; CARLETTA M. GRIER,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
KIMMY R. CATHEY,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge.
(8:15-cv-01357-GJH)

Submitted:

September 13, 2016

Decided:

September 16, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kimmy R. Cathey, Appellant Pro Se. Martin Stuart Goldberg, FISHER
LAW GROUP, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1458

Doc: 16

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Kimmy R. Cathey seeks to appeal the district court’s order
remanding this removed action to the state court for lack of
jurisdiction.

With certain exceptions not applicable here, “[a]n

order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed
is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 1447(d)

The Supreme Court has limited the scope of § 1447(d) to

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).
subject

matter

Here, the remand was based on lack of

jurisdiction.

Accordingly,

this

jurisdiction to review the district court’s order.

court

lacks

We therefore

deny Cathey leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the
appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

2