Charles Kim v. Darnell Card

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 3, 202422-17020California403 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHARLES KIM, No. 22-17020

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:22-cv-02247-TLN-AC

v.

MEMORANDUM*

DARNELL CARD,

Defendant-Appellant,

and

KRYSTAL PARKER,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 29, 2024**

Before: FRIEDLAND, BENNETT, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

Darnell Card appeals pro se from the district court’s order remanding this

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). unlawful detainer action to California state court. We have jurisdiction under

U.S.C. § 1447(d). BP P.L.C. v. Mayor & Council of Balt., 593 U.S. 230, 141 S.

Ct. 1532, 1538 (2021) (where 28 U.S.C § 1443 is asserted as a ground for removal,

appellate…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.