USCA11 Case: 24-12730 Document: 5-1 Date Filed: 10/29/2024 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-12730 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

RALEIGH CROSSTON, Defendant-Appellant, versus RANGEWATER REAL ESTATE, agent of Enclave at Oak Ridge, PDQ SERVICES INC.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia USCA11 Case: 24-12730 Document: 5-1 Date Filed: 10/29/2024 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-12730

D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-03421-ELR ____________________

Before GRANT, BRASHER, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Raleigh Crosston appeals from the district court’s August 1, 2024, order remanding the action to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We lack jurisdiction over this appeal because remand orders based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction are unreviewable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), (d); New v. Sports & Recreation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (11th Cir. 1997) (explaining that a remand order for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is unreviewable even if it is clearly erroneous); Kircher v. Putnam Funds Tr., 547 U.S. 633, 642 (2006). The court’s remand order is not otherwise appealable be- cause Crosston did not remove the action from state court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442 or 1443. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442, 1443; BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 593 U.S. 230, 238 (2021) (explain- ing that, to remove a case under §§ 1442 or 1443, a notice of re- moval must assert that the case is removable under one of those provisions). No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.