IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

MICHAEL MORENO

VS.

JOHN DOE and NICKEL EXPRESS 

INC.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 5:20-cv-00726

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

TO: THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, SAN 

ANTONIO DIVISION:

COMES NOW, NICKEL EXPRESS, Inc., in the above entitled and numbered cause, and 

presents this, its Notice of Removal of the above styled suit and pending in the 288th District Court 

of Bexar County, Texas, where the suit was instituted, to this United States District Court for the 

Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division. Removal is proper based on diversity of 

citizenship under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(a), 1441(a) and 1446. This is a civil action between citizens 

of different states, and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000.00, exclusive of 

interest and costs. Expressly reserving all questions other than that of removal, Defendant 

respectfully shows that removal is proper as follows:

I. Introduction

1.1 Plaintiff is Michael Moreno.

Case 5:20-cv-00726 Document 1 Filed 06/20/20 Page 1 of 4
1.2 Defendant is Nickel Express Inc. Defendant was at the time of this accident and still is a 

Michigan Corporation organized and incorporated under the laws of Michigan with its principal 

place of business in Michigan. Defendant is a citizen of Michigan. Defendant is not a citizen of 

Texas.

1.3 Because Plaintiff is a citizen of Texas and Defendant is a citizen of Michigan, complete 

diversity exists among the parties.

1.4 Plaintiff sued for injuries stemming from an alleged accident that occurred on January 23, 

2020. 

1.5 Defendant was served with the suit on May 21, 2020. Defendant files this notice of removal 

within the 30-day time period as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1). Bd. Of Regents of Univ. of 

Tex. Sys. V. Nippon Tel. & Tel. Corp., 478 F.3d 274, 278 (5th Cir. 2007).

II. Basis for Removal

2.1 Removal is proper because there is complete diversity between the parties. 28 U.S.C. 

§1332(a); Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 849, 899-900 (9th Cir. 2006). 

Plaintiff is a citizen of Texas. Defendant is corporation incorporated in Michigan with its principal 

place of business in Michigan. Additionally, the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, 

excluding interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Andrews v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 

447 F.3d 510, 514-15 (7th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff’s Petition states that “Plaintiffs is seeking monetary 

relief over $200,000, but not more than $1,000,000 including damages of any kind, penalties, costs, 

expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attorney’s fees.” Because it is clear from the face of the 

Petition that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, removal is proper.

2.2 Copies of all pleadings, process, orders, and other filings in the state-court suit are attached 

to this notice as required by 28 U.S.C. §1446(a).

Case 5:20-cv-00726 Document 1 Filed 06/20/20 Page 2 of 4
2.3 Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a) because the state court where the 

suit has been pending is located in this district.

2.4 Defendant will promptly file a copy of this notice of removal with the clerk of the state 

court where the suit has been pending.

III. Jury Demand

3.1 Plaintiff did not demand a jury in the state-court suit.

IV. Conclusion

4.1 Plaintiff, a citizen of Texas, filed this suit on February 6, 2020 in the 288th District Court 

of Bexar County in San Antonio, Texas. Defendant, a citizen of Michigan, was served with this 

lawsuit on May 21, 2020. Plaintiff alleged that he is seeking monetary relief over $200,000. This 

Notice of Removal is within the 30-day time period required by statute. For these reasons,

defendant asks the Court to remove the suit to the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Texas.

Respectfully submitted,

ROYSTON, RAYZOR, VICKERY & WILLIAMS, L.L.P.

By: /s/ Keith N. Uhles

Keith N. Uhles

Texas State Bar No. 20371100

E-Mail: keith.uhles@roystonlaw.com

55 Cove Circle

P. O. Box 3509

Brownsville, Texas78523-3509

Telephone: (956) 542-4377

Facsimile: (956) 542-4370

and

Christopher P. Schlüter

Texas State Bar No. 24110339

Case 5:20-cv-00726 Document 1 Filed 06/20/20 Page 3 of 4
E-Mail:christopher.schluter@roystonlaw.com

Fountainhead Tower

8200 I.H. 10 West, Suite 320

San Antonio, Texas 78230

Telephone: (210) 524-9696

Facsimile: (210) 524-9811

Attorneys for Defendant, 

Nickel Express, Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this the 20th day of June, 2020 the above and foregoing document 

was caused to be served upon all counsel of record via E-File/E-Mail/Facsimile and/or Regular 

U.S. Mail, as follows:

John Daspit

Daniel E. Perez

Daspit Law Firm

440 Louisiana Street, Suite 1400

Houston, Texas 77002

e-service@daspitlaw.com

/s/ Keith N. Uhles

Of Royston, Rayzor, Vickery & Williams, L.L.P.

Case 5:20-cv-00726 Document 1 Filed 06/20/20 Page 4 of 4