Case ID: f-appx_685/html/0279-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA CASUALTY INDEMNITY EXCHANGE; Marsden & Seledee; The O’Neal Law Firm, LLP; Thatcher Law Firm; Mitchell I. Batt, Individual Capacity; Bryan Chapman; Mr. Raouf Abdullah, Individual Capacity; C. Sukari Hardnett, Individual Capacity; Bradford Associates; Maryland State Education Association; Association of Supervisory & Administrative School; Maryland State Department of Education, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 16-2263
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 20, 2017
    Decided: April 24, 2017
    Josephat Mua, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas V. McCarron, James Olin Spiker, IV, SEMMES, BOWEN & SEMMES, Baltimore, Maryland, Joel D. Seledee, MARS-DEN & SELEDEE, LLO, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Josephat Mua seeks to appeal the district court’s order remanding the underlying action to state court. Subject to exceptions not applicable here, “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012); see E.D. ex rel. Darcy v. Pfizer, Inc., 722 F.3d 574, 579-83 (4th Cir. 2013). Because the district court’s order does not fall within the exceptions provided by § 1447, the order is not appealable.

Accordingly, we grant California Casualty Indemnity Exchange’s motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, but deny its motions for attorney’s fees and for reconsideration of our order granting Mua extensions of time. We grant Mua’s motions to exceed the length limitations for his appellate filings and for leave to file a supplemental brief, but deny Mua’s motions to suspend these proceedings. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED