CAFC discusses § 1447(d) in Preston v. Nagel

Of relevance:


Recognizing that § 1447(d) would ordinarily bar re-
viewability here, Nagel
asks us to hold that an exception exists
“where, as here, defendants invoked
§ 1454 to
remove patent claims over which federal courts have
exclusive jurisdiction.” Appellants’ Br. at 17. In support,
Nagel relies on
Osborn v. Haley, 549 U.S. 225 (2007), to
argue that the America In
vents Act (AIA) overrides § 1447(d)’s bar.

We disagree.

(...)
Nagel argues that the “Holmes Group fix” created the
one-way “intercourt shuttle” that Osborn
described.




link: http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-1524.Opinion.5-30-2017.1.PDF