removal statutes very strictly, and "all doubts about jurisdiction should be resolved in favor of remand to state court." Univ. of South Alabama'. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 41I (11th Cir. 1999) (citing Burns'. Windsor Ins. Co., 31 F.3d 1092, 1095 (11th Cir. 1994), and Coker'. Amoco Oil 3 EFTA00175559

jurisdiction must properly be addressed and resolved before this Court takes any further action in the case. E.g. , University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co. , 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

solve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

solve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

removal statutes very strictly, and "all doubts about jurisdiction should be resolved in favor of remand to state court." Univ. of South Alabama I American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (citing Bums. Windsor Ins. Co., 31 F.3d 1092, 1095 (11th Cir. 1994), and Coker. Amoco Oil 3 EFTA00234426 Cas

lve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

lve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

lve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching

lve the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction before proceeding any further with this matter. E.g., University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 411 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding that "the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching