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,

fically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [of removal] granted to 8 In Bonner v. City of Prichard,

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,

fically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [of removal] granted to 8 In Bonner v. City of Prichard,

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,

fically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [of removal] granted to In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661