4893-6659-3838.1

4863-1936-3887.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION

(F/K/A MOBIL CORPORATION), § 

§ 

Plaintiff, § 

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. _____________ 

VS § 

§ 

AIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. § 

(F/K/A AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL § 

SPECIALTY LINES INSURANCE CO.) , § 

§ 

Defendant. § 

DEFENDANT AIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL

TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES JUDGE:

Defendant, AIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO. formally known as AMERICAN 

INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY LINES INSURANCE CO. (“AISLIC”), files its Notice of 

Removal.

INTRODUCTION

1. With this Notice, AISLIC removes Cause No. DC-22-08019, pending in the 44th

Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. AISLIC timely files this notice of removal pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. §1446(b), within the thirty (30) days of the date on which AISLIC was able to 

ascertain that this lawsuit was removable and/or within thirty (30) days after the receipt by AISLIC, 

through service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon 

which such action or proceeding is based. 

22-1873

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1
2

NATURE OF THE STATE COURT ACTION

2. AISLIC issued Mobil Corporation an excess liability policy, Policy No. 773 95 16, 

for the period January 1, 1995 through January 1, 2001, with retroactive coverage from January 1, 

1993 (the “Mobil First Layer Policy”).

3. Under the Mobil First Layer Policy, Mobil Corporation is the “Named Insured.” 

The First Layer Policy provides in pertinent part that:

The Named Insured or such other person as it shall designate in Item 

5 of the Declarations shall represent the Named Insured and any and 

all Insureds hereunder in all matters under this Policy, including, 

without limitation, payment of premium, negotiation of the terms of 

renewal and/or reinstatement and the adjustment, settlement and 

payment of claims.

4. The Mobil First Layer Policy has limits of $50 million, excess of a $40 million 

annual aggregate retention and a $10 million per occurrence retention.

5. On or about July 14, 2022, the Plaintiff filed an action against AISLIC in the 44th 

Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas styled ExxonMobil Oil Corporation (f/k/a Mobil 

Corporation) v. AIG Specialty Insurance Co. (f/k/a American International Specialty Lines 

Insurance Co.) (the “State Court Action”).

6. The claim against AISLIC in the State Court Action is an insurance coverage 

dispute involving the fulfillment of retentions under the Mobil First Layer Policy in connection to 

benzene related claims.

7. AISLIC was served on July 29, 2022 in the State Court Action.

8. AISLIC filed its answer in the State Court Action prior to removal. 

JURISDICTIONAL BASIS FOR REMOVAL

9. This Court has diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The United 

States District Court has jurisdiction of this action, since it is between citizens and corporations of 

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 2 of 8 PageID 2
3

different States and the matter in controversary exceeds the sum or value of $75,000. AISLIC is 

a corporation incorporated under the laws of Illinois, with its principal place of business in New 

York. Based upon corporate records, the named Plaintiff in this action – ExxonMobil Oil

Corporation (“ExxonMobil Oil”) (allegedly formerly known as Mobil Corporation) – is not the 

real party in interest. The real party in interest is the party denominated by ExxonMobil Oil as 

“f/k/a Mobil Corporation”. Mobil Corporation, however, is an active corporation in good standing 

under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Texas. ExxonMobil Oil 

improperly identified Mobil Corporation as “formerly known as” when in fact it still exists and is 

the only proper party to assert this claim. The corporate history of Mobil Corporation, the First 

Named Insured under the Mobil First Layer Policy, demonstrates that it is the real party in interest 

to bring this claim against AISLIC.

10. In 1976, Mobil Oil Corporation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Mobil 

Corporation. At the time the Mobil First Layer Policy was issued by AISLIC to Mobil Corporation

in 1995, Mobil Oil Corporation continued to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Mobil Corporation.

11. In 1999, Mobil Corporation merged with Lion Acquisition Subsidiary Corporation, 

a subsidiary of Exxon Corporation, with Mobil Corporation being the surviving corporation and 

Lion Acquisition Subsidiary Corporation ceasing to exist. The surviving corporation, Mobil 

Corporation, still exists. Upon effectiveness of the 1999 transactions, Exxon Corporation changed 

its name to Exxon Mobil Corporation.

12. In 2001, Mobil Oil Corporation changed its name to ExxonMobil Oil Corporation, 

the putative named plaintiff in this action. ExxonMobil Oil is the successor by name change to 

Mobil Oil Corporation, not Mobil Corporation. Mobil Oil Corporation is a separate and distinct 

entity from Mobil Corporation. By using the phrase “f/k/a” in the caption to this action, 

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 3 of 8 PageID 3
4

ExxonMobil Oil indicated that it was the successor to Mobil Corporation by way of name change. 

See, e.g., Villare v. Katz, No. 08C-10-061 PLA, 2010 WL 2125462, at *5 (Del. Super. Ct. May 10, 

2010) (use of moniker “f/k/a” or “formerly known as” for Delaware corporation is indicative of a 

name change); Envo, Inc. v. Walters, No. CIVA 4156-VCP, 2009 WL 5173807, at *1 (Del. Ch. 

Dec. 30, 2009), aff’d, No. 460, 2012, 2013 WL 1283533 (Del. Mar. 28, 2013) (same). There is no 

evidence of such a transaction in the corporate records of Mobil Corporation, ExxonMobil Oil, or 

Exxon Mobil Corporation. Moreover, ExxonMobil Oil cannot be the successor by name change 

to Mobil Corporation because Mobil Corporation, the first Named Insured under the Mobil First 

Layer Policy, still exists and continues to be an active corporation in good standing under the laws 

of Delaware.

13. “Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.” Wieburg 

v. GTE Sw. Inc., 272 F.3d 302, 306 (5th Cir. 2001) (quoting FED. R. CIV. PRO. 17(a)). “‘The real 

party in interest is the person holding the substantive right sought to be enforced, and not 

necessarily the person who will ultimately benefit from the recovery.’ The purpose of this 

provision ‘is to assure a defendant that a judgment will be final and that res judicata will protect it 

from having to twice defend an action, once against an ultimate beneficiary of a right and then 

against the actual holder of the substantive right.’” Id. (quoting Farrell Construction Co. v. 

Jefferson Parish, La., 896 F.2d 136, 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1990)). The real party in interest to bring 

this suit is Mobil Corporation, who has the substantive right under the Mobil First Layer Policy to 

enforce.

14. Mobil Corporation is a corporation incorporated under the laws of Delaware, with 

its principal place of business in Texas. There is complete diversity between Mobil Corporation, 

who is a citizen of Delaware and Texas, and AISLIC, who is a citizen of Illinois and New York. 

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 4 of 8 PageID 4
5

The addition of ExxonMobil Oil supposedly as successor to Mobil Corporation is factually 

incorrect and improper. Mobil Corporation is an existing entity that is the First Named Insured in 

the Policy that is the subject of the action. See Airlines Reporting Corp. v. S & N Travel, Inc., 58 

F.3d 857, 862 (2d Cir. 1995) (“Accordingly, we will not deem [plaintiff]’s corporate citizenship 

controlling when it acts merely as an agent representing the interests of others. In such a case, the 

citizenship of the represented individuals controls for diversity purposes, as they are the real and 

substantial parties to the dispute.”). ExxonMobil Oil knew that its own citizenship would defeat 

diversity and attempted to prevent AISLIC from removing the State Court Action by improperly 

relying on its citizenship as opposed to Mobil Corporation’s citizenship. See Metal Forming 

Techs., Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Co., 224 F.R.D. 431, 437 (S.D. Ind. 2004) (holding that suing 

in plaintiff’s name “was a strategic and tactical decision in contravention of Rule 17(a)” and 

dismissing action after it was removed based on diversity).

VENUE IS PROPER IN THIS COURT

15. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas – Dallas

Division embraces the county in which the State Court Action was filed. Accordingly, this case 

is properly removed to this Court under 28 U.S.C § 1446(a).

REMOVAL IS TIMELY

16. The State Court Action was filed on or about July 14, 2022. AISLIC received 

formal service of process on July 29, 2022 and was delivered a copy of the citation and Plaintiff’s 

Original Petition. AISLIC timely files this notice of removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), 

within the thirty (30) days of the date on which AISLIC was able to ascertain that this lawsuit was 

removeable and/or within thirty (30) days after the receipt by AISLIC, through service or 

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 5 of 8 PageID 5
6

otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which such action 

or proceeding is based.

OTHER MATTERS

17. Written notice of the filing of this Notice of Removal will be given to all adverse 

parties, as required by the provisions of 28 U.S.C § 1446(d).

18. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1446(a) and Local Rule 81.1, a copy of the docket sheet in 

the State Court Action, an index of all filings to date in the State Court Action, copies of all such 

documents and signed certificate of interested persons are attached as follows:

Exhibit A - State Court Docket Sheet

Exhibit B - Index of State Court Filings

Exhibit C - State Court – Civil Case Information Sheet

Exhibit D - State Court – Original Petition

Exhibit E - State Court – Issue Citation – AIG Specialty Insurance Co.

Exhibit F - State Court – Order – Status Conference

Exhibit G - State Court – Executed Citation – AIG Specialty Insurance Co.

Exhibit H - State Court – Defendant’s Original Answer

Exhibit I - Certificate of Interested Persons/Disclosure Statement

19. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1446(d), a copy of this Notice of Removal is being served 

upon ExxonMobil Oil’s counsel, and a copy is being filed with the Clerk of the District Court of 

Dallas County, Texas.

WHEREFORE, AISLIC hereby removes this action to the United States District Court for 

the Northern District of Texas – Dallas Division.

Dated: Dallas, Texas

August 23, 2022

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 6 of 8 PageID 6
7

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

AIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO.

(F/K/A AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL

SPECIALTY LINES INSURANCE CO.)

Respectfully submitted,

GRAY REED

By: /s/ Darin L. Brooks 

Darin L. Brooks

Texas Bar No. 00796252

Brian E. Waters

Texas Bar No. 24078035

1300 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2000

Houston, Texas 77056

Telephone: (713) 986-7000

Facsimile: (713) 986-7100 

Email: dbrooks@grayreed.com

 bwaters@grayreed.com

London England

Texas Bar No. 24110313

1601 Elm Street, Suite 4600

Dallas, Texas 75201

Telephone: (214) 954-4135

Facsimile: (214) 953-1332

Email: lengland@grayreed.com

-AndSTROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP

By: /s/ Robert Lewin

Robert Lewin*

Christopher Ash*

180 Maiden Lane

New York, New York 10038

(212) 806-5400

rlewin@stroock.com

cash@stroock.com

Attorneys for Defendant AIG Specialty 

Insurance Co.

*Pro hac vice application forthcoming

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 7 of 8 PageID 7
8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of August, 2022, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing document was forwarded to all counsel of record in accordance with the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure, as follows:

Ernest Martin, Jr.

Adrian Azer

Greg Van Houton

HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP

2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700

Dallas, TX 75219-7672

emest.martin@haynesboone.com 

adrian.azer@haynesboone.com

greg.vanhouten@haynesboone.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

/s/ Darin L. Brooks

Darin L. Brooks

Case 3:22-cv-01873-B Document 1 Filed 08/23/22 Page 8 of 8 PageID 8