John Howard, Sr. v. Starsha Sewell

UNPUBLISHED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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Starsha Sewell appeals the district court remanding
this removed action to state court for lack of jurisdiction. An
order remanding a case to state court is generally not
reviewable on appeal or otherwise. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012).
The Supreme Court has limited the 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). In this case, remand was based
on lack of subject matter jurisdiction over a child custody
dispute. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. 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 of 2 --