Kristin E. Schelin; Mark A. Watson v. Karl L. Malloy

UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

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 of 2 --