Kristin Schelin v. Karl Malloy

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1067 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/01/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-1067 KRISTIN E. SCHELIN; MARK A. WATSON, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. KARL L. MALLOY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:24-cv-00059-MHL) Submitted: November 25, 2025 Decided: December 1, 2025 Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Karl Linard Malloy, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher Lawrence Perkins, ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1067 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/01/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Karl Linard Malloy appeals the district court’s order dismissing as moot his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for a stay pending appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order remanding to the state court an action that Malloy removed to the bankruptcy court. Because the district court has affirmed the bankruptcy court’s remand order, Schelin v. Malloy, No. 3:24-cv-00002-MHL (E.D. Va. Nov. 19, 2024), and because this court lacks jurisdiction to review the remand order, see 28 U.S.C. § 1334(d), the district court properly dismissed Malloy’s appeal as moot. See In re Pruett, 133 F.3d 275, 278 (4th Cir. 1997) (“An appeal should be dismissed as moot when, by virtue of an intervening event, a court of appeals cannot grant any effectual relief whatever in favor of the appellant.” (citation modified)). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Schelin v. Malloy, No. 3:24-cv-00059-MHL (E.D. Va. Dec. 18, 2024). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2