BSFR I Owner I L.P. v. Quneshia Rawls

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: July 8, 2025
• Docket: 25-11692
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-11692 Document: 6-1 Date Filed: 07/08/2025 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 25-11692 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

BSFR I OWNER I L.P., Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANTONIO SHELTON,

Defendant,

QUNESHIA RAWLS, & all other occupants,

Defendant-Appellant. USCA11 Case: 25-11692 Document: 6-1 Date Filed: 07/08/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-11692

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:25-cv-02343-AT ____________________

Before JORDAN, LUCK, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Quneshia Rawls, pro se, filed a notice of appeal that appears to seek review of the district court’s April 30, 2025, order remand- ing the case to Georgia state court. Because the order remanded the case for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, it is unre- viewable on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)-(d); New v. Sports & Rec- reation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (11th Cir. 1997) (concluding that a remand order based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction is un- reviewable even when “clearly erroneous”); Kircher v. Putnam Funds Tr., 547 U.S. 633, 641-42 (2006) (noting that a remand order pursu- ant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) is unreviewable “no matter how plain the legal error in ordering the remand”). Further, the notice of re- moval did not cite 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 or 1443 as a basis for removal.