Berkeley Lake LL, LLC v. Nyasha Fisher

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-12570

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

BERKELEY LAKE LL, LLC, d.b.a. Rosemont Berkeley Lake, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus NYASHA FISHER,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia

2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-12570

D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-03208-SCJ

____________________

Before BRANCH, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Nyasha Fisher appeals from the district court’s July 24, 2024, order remanding the case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A jurisdictional question asked whether the remand order is reviewable. Fisher responds that the order is appealable.

We conclude that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the remand order is unreviewable under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). The district court concluded that remand was necessary because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, and we may not review that conclusion even if it is erroneous. 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 the district court did not remand based on a procedural defect without waiting for a party’s motion, and Fisher did not remove the case under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 or 1443. See Corp. Mgmt. Advisors, Inc. v. Artjen Complexus, Inc., 561 F.3d 1294, 1296-97 (11th Cir. 2009); Overlook Gardens Props., LLC v. ORIX USA, L.P., 927 F.3d 1194, 1202 (11th Cir. 2019); 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d); BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 593 U.S. 230, 238 (2021).

Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction . All pending motions are DENIED as moot.