Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): to give such Court jurisdiction and all matters arising hereunder shall be determined in accord with the law and practice of such Court. [I]n any suit instituted against the Rein-surer under this Agreement the Reinsurer will abide by the final decision of such Court or of any reviewing Court. The district court held that, as a matter of contract interpretation, the service-of-suit clause waived the underwriters’ right to remove. Id. at 6. The district court interpreted the clause to provide that, by consenting to submit to any court of competent jurisdiction at the request of the reinsured, the underwriters agreed to go to, and stay in, the forum chosen by the receivership, which was the state court. Id. at 7, citing Foster v. Chesapeake Ins. Co., 933 F.2d 1207, 1217 (3d Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 908, 112 S.Ct. 302, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that state could not assert sovereign immunity defense where the state had waived immunity in state court and agreed to remove suit to federal court (B) holding that the defendant waived the right to challenge a suppression ruling on appeal (C) holding that a similar serviceofsuit clause waived the defendants right to remove (D) recognizing similar duties (E) holding that later served defendants each have thirty days to remove to federal court
Output (English): holding that state could not assert sovereign immunity defense where the state had waived immunity in state court and agreed to remove suit to federal court