Case ID: f-appx_683/html/0325-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

D. Patrick SMITHERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, L.L.C., Defendants-Appellees
    No. 16-20328
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Filed March 29, 2017
    
      D. Patrick Smitherman, Pro Se
    Michael Clifton Maus, Litigation Counsel, Barrett, Daffin, Frappier, Turner & Engel, L.L.P., Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

D. Patrick Smitherman, proceeding pro se, brought suit against Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC in Texas state court, alleging various state law claims regarding foreclosure proceedings related to Smitherman’s mortgage loan. Bayview removed to federal court under a diversity jurisdiction theory. The district court denied Smitherman’s motion to remand and then dismissed Smitherman’s claims with prejudice.

We ordered a limited remand to the district court to permit supplementation of the record and to make findings regarding Bayview’s citizenship. The district court then issued an order vacating its judgment and remanding the case to state court. Because the district court lacked the authority to do so, we construe it’s order to be an indicative ruling made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1(a)(3).

Accordingly, we REMAND this case to the district court and DISMISS the appeal as moot and relinquish jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1(b). 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.