Opinion ID: 770968
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Jorge Carcamo v. Shell Oil Co. (Jorge)

Text: 9 The Jorge plaintiffs are nine representatives who filed suit originally in Brazoria County, Texas, on behalf of themselves and an uncertified class of more than 16,000citizens and residents of twelve foreign countries. 10 Defendant Dow filed a third-party petition against Dead Sea, Ameribrom, and the Del Monte entities and delivered a courtesy copy of that petition to Dead Sea. More than thirty days had elapsed since Dow had served its original answer in state court, and Dow did not obtain state court leave prior to filing the third-party petition. Regardless, on the same day that Dow filed its third-party petition, Dead Sea removed the case to the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division. 11 Predictably, the other defendants joined in the removal, asserting additional bases of subject matter jurisdiction, and filed cross-claims. Shell filed supplemental notices of removal. The Jorge plaintiffs filed motions to remand, arguing that (1) Dead Sea's removal was procedurally defective for want of state court leave to serve Dead Sea, and that (2) the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction as the Jorge plaintiffs' Seventh Amended Petition expressly renounced any intention of pursuing claims against Dead Sea or its affiliated entities, thus rendering Dead Sea's joinder fraudulent. Subsequent to removal, however, Dow moved for leave to serve an amended third-party complaint impleading, inter alia, Dead Sea. 12 The motion was referred to a magistrate judge, who granted the motion.