Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-24-06808/USCOURTS-ca4-24-06808-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6808

RODNEY E. COBBS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SHERIFF EDWARD MCMAHON,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:24-ct-03012-FL)

Submitted: December 19, 2024 Decided: December 27, 2024

Before KING and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney E. Cobbs, Appellant Pro Se. Frederick Hughes Bailey, III, SUMRELL SUGG, 

PA, New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6808 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Rodney E. Cobbs appeals the district court’s order remanding to state court, 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), Cobbs’s civil case against Edward McMahon. “We 

review de novo questions of subject-matter jurisdiction, including removal.”*

 Republican 

Nat’l Comm. v. N.C. State Bd. of Elections, 120 F.4th 390, 398 (4th Cir. 2024). We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the district court’s 

order. Cobbs v. McMahon, No. 5:24-ct-03012-FL (E.D.N.C. Aug 14, 2024). We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* We reject McMahon’s contention that we lack jurisdiction to review the district 

court’s remand order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (stating that “an order remanding a case to 

the State court from which it was removed pursuant to [28 U.S.C. § 1442 or § 1443] shall 

be reviewable by appeal”); BP P.L.C. v. Mayor & City Council of Balt., 141 S. Ct. 1532, 

1538 (2021) (“To remove a case pursuant to § 1442 or § 1443 . . . just means that a 

defendant’s notice of removal must assert the case is removable in accordance with or by 

reason of one of those provisions.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6808 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 2