Court Opinion

ID: 9379054
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-14 16:00:34.453891+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:48.514744
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                         For the Eighth Circuit
                     ___________________________

                             No. 22-2736
                     ___________________________

                           Kimberly Maria Myles

                    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                       v.

                          Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

                    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
                                   ____________

                 Appeal from United States District Court
                 for the Southern District of Iowa - Central
                               ____________

                         Submitted: March 7, 2023
                          Filed: March 14, 2023
                              [Unpublished]
                              ____________

Before LOKEN, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.
      Kimberly Myles appeals an order of the district court1 declining to remand this
removed employment discrimination action to state court. She also appeals the
court’s later adverse grant of summary judgment. After careful review of the record
and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we affirm.

       We reject Myles’s argument that this case was untimely removed, as the notice
of removal (NOR) was filed within 30 days after the defendant could have first
ascertained that the case was removable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(3) (if case stated
by initial pleading is not removable, NOR may be filed within 30 days after
defendant’s receipt of copy of order from which it may first be ascertained that case
is removable). Further, we conclude that summary judgment was proper for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Banks v. John Deere & Co., 829 F.3d 661,
665 (8th Cir. 2016) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo). Accordingly,
we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We construe Myles’s motion as a request to correct
her reply brief, and we grant it.
                        ______________________________

      1
        The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa, in part adopting the report and recommendations
of the Honorable Helen C. Adams, Chief Magistrate Judge, United States District
Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

                                         -2-