Skip to main content


On May 6, 2021, in Shipley v. Helping Hands Therapy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that non-jurisdictional remands must be based on timely motions to remand that assert procedural defects. This holding revisited a split between the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth and Fifth Circuits regarding the proper interpretation of 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)’s non-jurisdictional remand provision. The Ninth Circuit—much like the Eleventh Circuit but with different reasoning—found that both the raising of the procedural defect and the motion to remand must be timely, whereas the Fifth Circuit held that only the motion to remand must be timely. This Comment argues that the Eleventh Circuit’s approach is preferable because it better employs canons of statutory interpretation and arrives at a conclusion that is supported by legislative intent.


File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
7 Sep 2022
279 kB



  • Subject
    • Courts

    • Jurisdiction

  • Journal title
    • Boston College Law Review

  • Volume
    • 63

  • Issue
    • 9

  • Pagination
    • E.Supp. II.-46

  • Date submitted

    7 September 2022