Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

William Scott Davis, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and remanding his case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An order remanding a case to state court is generally not reviewable on appeal or otherwise. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2006). The Supreme Court has limited § 1447(d) to insulate from appellate review those remand orders based on the grounds specified in § 1447(c): a defect in the removal procedure or a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Qua ckenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 711-12, 116 S.Ct. 1712, 135 L.Ed.2d 1 (1996). In this case, the district court remanded the case because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the proceeding. Moreover, this case does not implicate § 1443. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Davis also appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion to stay the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation, motion to appoint counsel, and motion for extension of time to file additional pleadings. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wake Cnty. Human Servs. v. Davis, No. 5:12-cv-00413-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 9, 2013; Apr. 22, 2013). We deny Davis’ motions to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument be *273 cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.