Opinion
Civil Action No. 10-cv-00693-ZLW.
April 27, 2010
ORDER
Defendants, Russell E. Green and Nicole K. Green, have filed pro se on April 23, 2010, a "Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction on Clerical Mistake and Ommision [sic]" and documents titled "Removal to Federal Court — 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1441 — Federal Question of Real Party in Interest-Dismiss Foreclosure Filed in State Court" and "FRCP Rule 60(b) Relief From Order Due to Mistake." Defendants ask the Court to reconsider the Court's Order for Summary Remand filed in this action on April 16, 2010. In the Order for Summary Remand, the Court determined that the notice of removal filed by defendant Russell E. Green was both substantively and procedurally deficient and remanded this action to the Denver District Court. The Court will construe the documents filed on April 23 collectively as a motion to reconsider the Order for Summary Remand.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise" unless the case was removed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1443. Section 1447(d) precludes review of remand orders entered on grounds permitted by § 1447(c), namely lack of subject-matter jurisdiction or a defect in the removal procedure. See Miller v. Lambeth , 443 F.3d 757, 759 (10th Cir. 2006).
The instant action was not removed to this Court pursuant to § 1443, which provides for removal of certain civil rights cases. Furthermore, the Court's Order for Summary Remand was premised on both procedural defects and a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Therefore, pursuant to § 1447(d), the Court also lacks jurisdiction to reconsider the Order for Summary Remand. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the "Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction on Clerical Mistake and Ommision [sic]" filed on April 23, 2010, and the documents titled "Removal to Federal Court — 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1441 — Federal Question of Real Party in Interest-Dismiss Foreclosure Filed in State Court" and "FRCP Rule 60(b) Relief From Order Due to Mistake" also filed on April 23, 2010 are construed collectively as a request to reconsider the Court's Order for Summary Remand and are denied for lack of jurisdiction.