Epstein Secrets

imity among the defendants. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § I446(b) the undersigned are authorized to represent that all of the defendants join this Petition and consent to removal. Conclusion Because this is a civil action between citizens of different states, excluding any fraudulently joined parties,

s pled here. Thus, in resorting to fraudulent joinder, the plaintiff has sought to avoid any application of this otherwise controlling statute. Cf. Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 MCR/WCS, 2005 WL 517847, at *1-2 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005) (staying civil diversity action over plaintiffs' objections on grounds

imity among the defendants. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(6) the undersigned are authorized to represent that all of the defendants join this Petition and consent to removal. Conclusion Because this is a civil action between citizens of different states, excluding any fraudulently joined parties,

s pled here. Thus, in resorting to fraudulent joinder, the plaintiff has sought to avoid any application of this otherwise controlling statute. Cf. Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 MCR/WCS, 2005 WL 517847, at *1-2 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005) (staying civil diversity action over plaintiffs' objections on grounds

imity among the defendants. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) the undersigned are authorized to represent that all of the defendants join this Petition and consent to removal. Conclusion Because this is a civil action between citizens of different states, excluding any fraudulently joined parties,

s pled here. Thus, in resorting to fraudulent joinder, the plaintiff has sought to avoid any application of this otherwise controlling statute. cf Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 MCR/WCS, 2005 WI_ 517847, at *1-2 (ND. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005) (staying civil diversity action over plaintiffs' objections on grounds

imity among the defendants. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) the undersigned are authorized to represent that all of the defendants join this Petition and consent to removal. Conclusion Because this is a civil action between citizens of different states, excluding any fraudulently joined parties,

s pled here. Thus, in resorting to fraudulent joinder, the plaintiff has sought to avoid any application of this otherwise controlling statute. Cf. Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 Mat/WCS, 2005 WL 517847, at *1-2 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005) (staying civil diversity action over plaintiffs' objections on grounds