Case Information
*1 Case 1:07-cv-00468-CG-B Document 13 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
ALLIED AMERICAN ADJUSTING )
COMPANY, LLC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-0468-CG-B
)
JIMMIE N. FAIR; and )
SHELLY R. FAIR, )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ notice of removal (Doc. 1), plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. 3), defendants’ motion for leave to amend the notice of removal and response to the motion to remand (Doc. 7), plaintiff’s response to the motion for leave (Doc. 9) and defendants’ reply (Doc. 10).
Plaintiff seeks remand based on defendants’ failure to attach copies of the summonses which were served on defendants and failure to allege the “citizenship” of the defendants and the principal place of business of plaintiff corporation. Plaintiff does not allege that there is a lack of complete diversity, but merely that the required facts were not adequately stated in the notice of removal. The notice of removal did affirmatively state the “residency” of the defendants and the plaintiff’s state of incorporation. In response, defendants move to amend the petition for removal to correct the omissions of which plaintiff complains. Plaintiff’s response to the motion to amend does not expressly oppose the amendment, but simply stresses the reasons why plaintiff was compelled to point out the omissions.
1
Case 1:07-cv-00468-CG-B Document 13 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 2 A federal district court has jurisdiction over a removed case, despite the fact that the defendant has failed to comply with the requirement contained in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) that a copy of "all process, pleadings, and orders" be filed together with the removal petition. Covington v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North America, 251 F.2d 930, 933 (5 th Cir. 1958) (citation and internal quotations omitted). “[R]emoval proceedings are in the nature of process” and “mere modal or procedural defects are not jurisdictional.” Id. Under the circumstances of this case, the court finds it appropriate to allow defendants to amend their notice of removal to include the omitted information and comply with the requirements of § 1446(a). Therefore, defendants’ motion to amend (Doc. 7) is GRANTED .
The amendment will cure the alleged defects of the notice of removal. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. 3) is DENIED .
DONE and ORDERED this 24 th day of August, 2007.
/s/ Callie V. S. Granade CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2