Asset Living v. Kyla Snead

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 25-10162 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

ASSET LIVING, THE CARTER @ 5240, Plaintiffs-Appellees, versus KYLA SNEAD,

Defendant-Appellant. ____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-05954-WMR ____________________ 2 Opinion of the Court 25-10162

Before GRANT, LUCK, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Kyla Snead, proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court’s December 30, 2024, order remanding the case to state court. We lack jurisdiction to review the remand order, even if it is erroneous, because the district court’s basis for remand was lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), (d); New v. Sports & Recreation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (11th Cir. 1997); Kircher v. Putnam Funds Tr., 547 U.S. 633, 642 (2006). The remand order is not otherwise reviewable because Snead’s notice of re- moval did not purport to remove the state court case under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 or 1443. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442, 1443, 1447(d); BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 593 U.S. 230, 238 (2021). No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.