Case Name: David S. DEHORSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Catherine M. DEHORSE; Michael A. DeHorse; Catherine L. DeHorse; Callie L. DeHorse, Defendants-Appellees, v. United States of America, Third Party Defendant, Guy Gustave Hardman, II, Party-in-Interest
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-03-27
Citations: 563 F. App'x 226
Docket Number: No. 13-2372
Parties: David S. DEHORSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Catherine M. DEHORSE; Michael A. DeHorse; Catherine L. DeHorse; Callie L. DeHorse, Defendants-Appellees, v. United States of America, Third Party Defendant, Guy Gustave Hardman, II, Party-in-Interest.
Judges: Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 563
Pages: 226–226

Head Matter:
David S. DEHORSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Catherine M. DEHORSE; Michael A. DeHorse; Catherine L. DeHorse; Callie L. DeHorse, Defendants-Appellees, v. United States of America, Third Party Defendant, Guy Gustave Hardman, II, Party-in-Interest.
No. 13-2372.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 25, 2014.
Decided: March 27, 2014.
David S. DeHorse, Appellant Pro Se. James Albert McLean, III, McCoy, Wiggins, Cleveland & O’Connor, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David S. DeHorse appeals the district court's order remanding the underlying action to North Carolina state court. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Subject to exceptions not applicable here, "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not renewable on appeal or otherwise." 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012); see E.D. ex rel. Darcy v. Pfizer, Inc., 722 F.3d 574, 581-83 (4th Cir.2013). Because the district court's order does not fall within any of the exceptions provided under § 1447, the order is not appealable.
We therefore grant the Appellees' motion to dismiss DeHorse's appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.