GALEA v. LAW OFFICES OF CARY ALAN CLIFF (2019)

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed January 15, 2019, be affirmed. The district court correctly held that removal of appellant's Florida proceeding was not proper. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) (permitting removal of a state court civil action “by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending”). The court also correctly determined that venue was improper, because the defendants do not reside, and the events giving rise to the complaint did not occur, in this district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Buchanan v. Manley, 145 F.3d 386, 388-89 (D.C. Cir. 1998). Finally, the district court properly held it lacked jurisdiction to review the decisions of state courts. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 416, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam