Charles Kim v. Darnell Card
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED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…