TERRENCE BOYLE, Chief Judge, District
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration or to Certify Case for Immediate Appeal. This Motion relates to this Court's Order of August 12, 1998, granting Plaintiff's Motion to Remand and denying Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions. For the reasons discussed below, Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration or to Certify Case for Immediate Appeal will be denied.
Section 1447(d) of Title 28 of the United States Code is dispositive, stating that "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise. . . ." Therefore, this Court will not issue a Certificate of Appealability in this matter.
There is an exception regarding Civil Rights cases, but this exception clearly does not apply here.
Defendants argue that this Court was in error when it decided to remand this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and that reconsideration is in order. However, case law makes it clear that this Court lacks the power to take any further action in this matter. As the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has stated, "once a district court has decided to remand a case and has so notified the state court, the district judge is without power to take any further action. This is true no matter how erroneous the district judge may later decide his remand action was." Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Santiago Plaza, 598 F.2d 634 (1st Cir. 1979). The Fourth Circuit has recently reinforced this rule, stating that an order remanding a case to a State's courts may not be reconsidered by the district court in question. See In re Lowe, 102 F.3d 731 (4th Cir. 1996). Thus, this Court does not reach the merits behind Defendants' Motion to Reconsider.
For the reasons discussed above, Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration or to Certify Case for Immediate Appeal is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.