New Square, LLC. v. Lashonda Miles-Broadway

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-10126 Document: 8-1 Date Filed: 02/28/2025 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 25-10126 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

NEW SQUARE, LLC., d.b.a. Square at Lawrenceville, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LASHONDA MILES-BROADWAY,

Defendant-Appellant,

MIYANA BROADWAY,

Defendant. USCA11 Case: 25-10126 Document: 8-1 Date Filed: 02/28/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 25-10126

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-05942-MLB ____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Lashonda Miles-Broadway, proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court’s December 31, 2024, order remanding her case to Georgia state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We lack jurisdiction to review that order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), (d) (generally barring review of orders remanding cases removed from state court); MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Hanover Ins. Co., 995 F.3d 1289, 1294 (11th Cir. 2021) (explaining that remand orders for which review is barred include those based on a lack of subject mat- ter jurisdiction); Whole Health Chiropractic & Wellness, Inc. v. Hu- mana Med. Plan, Inc., 254 F.3d 1317, 1319 (11th Cir. 2001) (explain- ing that remand orders are only reviewable if, as relevant here, they are based on grounds other than lack of subject matter jurisdic- tion); New v. Sports & Recreation, 114 F.3d 1092, 1096 (11th Cir. 1997) (explaining that “a district court does not have to expressly state its reliance on section 1447(c) to preclude appellate review”). Additionally, Miles-Broadway did not invoke 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 or 1443 in her notice of removal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d); BP P.L.C. v. Mayor of Balt., 141 S. Ct. 1532, 1538 (2021). USCA11 Case: 25-10126 Document: 8-1 Date Filed: 02/28/2025 Page: 3 of 3

25-10126 Opinion of the Court 3

Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. 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.