Preview
CAUSE NO. 20-DCV-278754
NIRAJ SHAH IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff
Vv
WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
SOCIETY, FSB, DOING BUSINESS
AS CHRISTIANA TRUST, NOT
INDIVIDUALLY BUT SOLELY AS
TRUSTEE FOR PREMIUM MORTGAGE
ACQUISITION TRUST BY SELENE
FINANCE, LP AS SERVICER
Defendants 434" JUDICIAL DISTRICT
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING REMOVAL
On December 8, 2020, Defendants, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing
Business as Christiana Trust, Not Individually But Solely As Trustee for Pretium Mortgage
Acquisition Trust (incorrectly named) (“Trustee”) and Selene Finance LP (“Selene”) (both are
collectively “Defendants”) filed the attached Notice of Removal (without exhibits — documents
previously filed in the above-styled case) in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. See attached Exhibit “A”.
Respectfully submitted,
HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C.
By:_/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
State Bar No. 00784294
Eric C. Mettenbrink
State Bar No. 24043819
1415 Louisiana, 36" Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 220-9182 Telephone
(713) 223-9319 Facsimile
mhord@hirschwest.com
emettenbrink@hirschwest.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
20130376,20200799/3905616.1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 8" day of December 2020, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Notice of Filing Removal was served as follows:
Karen P. Kealy
Kealy Law Firm, PLLC
11811 N. Frwy, Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77060
Via E-File
/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
20130376 ,20200799/3905616.1
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document 1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 1 of 6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
EXHIBIT
NIRAJ SHAH
Plaintiff
V.
4:20-cv-4177
C.A. NO.
WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
SOCIETY, FSB, DOING BUSINESS
AS CHRISTIANA TRUST, NOT
INDIVIDUALLY BUT SOLELY AS
TRUSTEE FOR PREMIUM MORTGAGE
ACQUISITION TRUST BY SELENE
FINANCE, LP AS SERVICER
Defendants
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF REMOVAL
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1332, 1441 and 1446, Wilmington
Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing Business as Christiana Trust, Not Individually But Solely As
Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition Trust (incorrectly named) (“Trustee”) and Selene
Finance LP (“Selene”) (both are collectively “Defendants”), through undersigned counsel,
hereby remove this case from the 434th Judicial District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas to the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Defendants
deny the allegations in the Complaint, and file this Notice without waiving any defenses,
exceptions, or obligations that may exist in their favor in state or federal court.
I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION
1 On November 25, 2020, Plaintiff, Niraj Shah (“Plaintiff*) commenced this action
by filing a Petition, Cause No. 20-DCV-278754 in the 434th Judicial District Court of Fort Bend
20130376,20200799/3899613.1
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 2 of 6
County, Texas (the “State Court Action”).! Plaintiff also obtained an ex parte temporary
restraining order seeking to preclude foreclosure by Defendant for 14 days.? Defendants filed an
answer to Plaintiff's Complaint on December 4, 2020, in the State Court Action Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1446(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Notice of Removal is timely filed
within thirty days of service on Defendants of the initial state court pleading. This action relates
to Plaintiffs attempt to prevent a foreclosure sale occasioned by a loan in default and is at least
the third frivolous lawsuit filed by Plaintiff relating to the same mortgage, this time in breach of
a written settlement agreement, in which he contractually agreed not to contest foreclosure.
Il. PLEADINGS AND NOTICE TO STATE COURT
2. True and correct copies of all process and pleadings in the State Court Action are
being filed along with this Notice of Removal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), written notice
of this removal is being served on Plaintiff and filed in the State Court Action.
iil. STATEMENT OF STATUTORY BASIS FOR JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3 This action is within the original jurisdiction of the United States District Court
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(1). That statute provides, in pertinent part, that “the district
courts shall have the original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy
exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of
different States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1).
4 Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a) because the state court
where the State Court Action has been pending is located in this district. As discussed in detail
below, this action satisfies the statutory requirements for diversity of citizenship jurisdiction.
1 See Plaintiff's Original Petition (the “Complaint”), Exhibit C-1.
2 See TRO, Exhibit C-3.
3 See Defendants’ Answer, Exhibit C-5.
20130376,20200799/3899613.1
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 3 of 6
Iv. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION
A. Citizenship of the Partie:
5 This civil action involves a controversy between citizens of different states.
According to Plaintiff's Complaint, Plaintiff resided in and was and is domiciled in Fort Bend
County, Texas at all material times and is therefore a citizen of Texas for diversity purposes.*
6 Defendant Trustee is not a citizen of Texas. When determining citizenship of a
trust for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, it is the citizenship of the trustee which controls, not
the citizenship of the beneficiaries of the trust.>
7 Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, is a federal savings bank chartered under
the laws of the United States. Wilmington’s home office is located in Delaware, and therefore it
is a citizen of Delaware for diversity purposes.®
8 Because Plaintiff is not a citizen of the same state as Defendant, the parties are
completely diverse.”
9. Selene Finance LP, which is referenced by Plaintiff, is merely the mortgage
servicer for Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing Business as Christiana Trust, Not
Individually But Solely As Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition Trust. Accordingly,
Selene Finance LP as mortgage servicer is a nominal party and therefore its citizenship is not
counted for diversity purposes.* The relief sought by Plaintiff consists of a variety of claims
challenging the right of the mortgagee to foreclose based on standing and other claims. Selene
See Complaint at { 2.
Navarro Sav. Ass'n v. Lee, 446 U.S. 458, 464, 100 S.Ct. 1779, 64 L.Ed.2d 425 (1980).
See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(x).
See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Wis. Dep't of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381, 388 (1998).
USS. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Richardson, No. 3:17-CV-2271-L, 2019 WL 1115059, at *4 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 11, 2019)
(citing Powell v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC, No. 4:16-CV-251, 2017 WL 191261, at *2 (E.D. Tex., Jan. 18,
2017)); see Schmelzer v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, No. 4:16-CV-389, 2016 WL 4368735,
*1 (ED. Tex. August 16, 2016).
20130376,20200799/38996}3,)
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 4 of 6
Finance LP is the mortgage servicer and not the mortgagee. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants
contend that Selene Finance LP is the mortgagee, therefore Selene Finance LP is, at most, a
nominal party or is improperly joined and its citizenship is not counted for diversity purposes.
B. Amount in Controversy
10. This case places an amount in controversy that exceeds the $75,000 threshold.
The property securing the loan at issue is identified by its address of 2515 Willow Springs Lane,
Sugar Land, Texas 77479 (the “Property”).” Per the Fort Bend County Appraisal District, the tax
appraised value of the collateral at issue for 2020 is no less than $233,760.00.°
11. Among other things, the Complaint purportedly seeks declaratory and injunctive
relief seeking to preclude Trustee from exercising its contractual and legal right to foreclose on
the Property which serves as collateral for first lien indebtedness owed to Trustee.!
12. In this case, it is apparent from the Complaint that the jurisdictional threshold is
satisfied by the request for injunctive relief pertaining to the subject loan and Property.
13, Federal jurisdiction can be established by facts alleged in the petition for removal
that support a conclusion that the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied.'? “In actions
seeking declaratory or injunctive relief, it is well established that the amount in controversy is
13
measured by the value of the object of the litigation.
14, “[W]hen the validity of a contract or a right to property is called into question in
its entirety, the value of the property controls the amount in controversy.”!* “[T]he amount in
controversy, in an action for declaratory or injunctive relief, is the value of the right to be protected
9 See Complaint at 8.
10 See Exhibit D.
1 See Complaint at { 34 and § 37 and Prayer.
2 Menendez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 364 Fed. Appx. 62, 66, 2010 WL 445470, 2 (5th Cir. 2010) (unpublished)
(citing Garcia v. Koch Oil Co. of Texas, Inc., 351 F.3d 636, 638-39 (Sth Cir. 2003)).
13 Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Adver. Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333, 347, 97 S. Ct. 2434, 53 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1977).
“ Waller v. Prof'l Ins. Corp., 296 F.2d 545, 547-48 (Sth Cir. 1961).
4
20130376,20200799/3899613.1
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document 1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 5 of 6
or the extent of the injury to be prevented.”!> Also, where a party seeks to quiet title or undo a
foreclosure, the object of the litigation is the property at issue and the amount in controversy is
measured by the value of the property.!°
15. Plaintiff filed this action for the purpose of precluding foreclosure and seeks
injunctive relief precluding foreclosure.!’ In addition to seeking unspecified money damages,
based on the foregoing the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction is met.
Vv. JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff has made no known jury demand in the State Court Action.
Vi. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants ask the Court to remove this suit to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
Respectfully submitted,
HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C.
By:_/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
State Bar No. 00784294
Federal LD. No. 16035
Eric C. Mettenbrink
State Bar No. 24043819
Federal I.D. No. 569887
1415 Louisiana, 36" Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 220-9182 Telephone
(713) 223-9319 Facsimile
mhord@hirschwest.com
emettenbrink@hirschwest.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
15 Webb v. Investacorp, Inc., 89 F.3d 252 (5th Cir. 1996), citing Leininger v. Leininger, 705 F.2d 727 (Sth Cir. 1983).
16 See Berry v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 2009 WL 2868224, at *2 (S.D. Tex. August 27, 2009).
7 See Complaint Generally and Prayer.
5
20130376.20200799/3899613.)
Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 6 of 6
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 8 day of December 2020, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Notice of Removal was served as follows:
Karen P. Kealy
Kealy Law Firm, PLLC
11811 N. Frwy, Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77060
Via Email and U.S. Regular Mail
/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
20130376.20200799/3899613.1
Preview
CAUSE NO. 20-DCV-278754 NIRAJ SHAH IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff Vv WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS SOCIETY, FSB, DOING BUSINESS AS CHRISTIANA TRUST, NOT INDIVIDUALLY BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE FOR PREMIUM MORTGAGE ACQUISITION TRUST BY SELENE FINANCE, LP AS SERVICER Defendants 434" JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING REMOVAL On December 8, 2020, Defendants, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing Business as Christiana Trust, Not Individually But Solely As Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition Trust (incorrectly named) (“Trustee”) and Selene Finance LP (“Selene”) (both are collectively “Defendants”) filed the attached Notice of Removal (without exhibits — documents previously filed in the above-styled case) in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. See attached Exhibit “A”. Respectfully submitted, HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C. By:_/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. State Bar No. 00784294 Eric C. Mettenbrink State Bar No. 24043819 1415 Louisiana, 36" Floor Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 220-9182 Telephone (713) 223-9319 Facsimile mhord@hirschwest.com emettenbrink@hirschwest.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 20130376,20200799/3905616.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 8" day of December 2020, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing Removal was served as follows: Karen P. Kealy Kealy Law Firm, PLLC 11811 N. Frwy, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77060 Via E-File /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. 20130376 ,20200799/3905616.1 Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document 1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION EXHIBIT NIRAJ SHAH Plaintiff V. 4:20-cv-4177 C.A. NO. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, DOING BUSINESS AS CHRISTIANA TRUST, NOT INDIVIDUALLY BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE FOR PREMIUM MORTGAGE ACQUISITION TRUST BY SELENE FINANCE, LP AS SERVICER Defendants DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1332, 1441 and 1446, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing Business as Christiana Trust, Not Individually But Solely As Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition Trust (incorrectly named) (“Trustee”) and Selene Finance LP (“Selene”) (both are collectively “Defendants”), through undersigned counsel, hereby remove this case from the 434th Judicial District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Defendants deny the allegations in the Complaint, and file this Notice without waiving any defenses, exceptions, or obligations that may exist in their favor in state or federal court. I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION 1 On November 25, 2020, Plaintiff, Niraj Shah (“Plaintiff*) commenced this action by filing a Petition, Cause No. 20-DCV-278754 in the 434th Judicial District Court of Fort Bend 20130376,20200799/3899613.1 Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 2 of 6 County, Texas (the “State Court Action”).! Plaintiff also obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order seeking to preclude foreclosure by Defendant for 14 days.? Defendants filed an answer to Plaintiff's Complaint on December 4, 2020, in the State Court Action Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Notice of Removal is timely filed within thirty days of service on Defendants of the initial state court pleading. This action relates to Plaintiffs attempt to prevent a foreclosure sale occasioned by a loan in default and is at least the third frivolous lawsuit filed by Plaintiff relating to the same mortgage, this time in breach of a written settlement agreement, in which he contractually agreed not to contest foreclosure. Il. PLEADINGS AND NOTICE TO STATE COURT 2. True and correct copies of all process and pleadings in the State Court Action are being filed along with this Notice of Removal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), written notice of this removal is being served on Plaintiff and filed in the State Court Action. iil. STATEMENT OF STATUTORY BASIS FOR JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3 This action is within the original jurisdiction of the United States District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(1). That statute provides, in pertinent part, that “the district courts shall have the original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of different States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). 4 Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a) because the state court where the State Court Action has been pending is located in this district. As discussed in detail below, this action satisfies the statutory requirements for diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. 1 See Plaintiff's Original Petition (the “Complaint”), Exhibit C-1. 2 See TRO, Exhibit C-3. 3 See Defendants’ Answer, Exhibit C-5. 20130376,20200799/3899613.1 Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 3 of 6 Iv. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION A. Citizenship of the Partie: 5 This civil action involves a controversy between citizens of different states. According to Plaintiff's Complaint, Plaintiff resided in and was and is domiciled in Fort Bend County, Texas at all material times and is therefore a citizen of Texas for diversity purposes.* 6 Defendant Trustee is not a citizen of Texas. When determining citizenship of a trust for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, it is the citizenship of the trustee which controls, not the citizenship of the beneficiaries of the trust.> 7 Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, is a federal savings bank chartered under the laws of the United States. Wilmington’s home office is located in Delaware, and therefore it is a citizen of Delaware for diversity purposes.® 8 Because Plaintiff is not a citizen of the same state as Defendant, the parties are completely diverse.” 9. Selene Finance LP, which is referenced by Plaintiff, is merely the mortgage servicer for Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Doing Business as Christiana Trust, Not Individually But Solely As Trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition Trust. Accordingly, Selene Finance LP as mortgage servicer is a nominal party and therefore its citizenship is not counted for diversity purposes.* The relief sought by Plaintiff consists of a variety of claims challenging the right of the mortgagee to foreclose based on standing and other claims. Selene See Complaint at { 2. Navarro Sav. Ass'n v. Lee, 446 U.S. 458, 464, 100 S.Ct. 1779, 64 L.Ed.2d 425 (1980). See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(x). See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Wis. Dep't of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381, 388 (1998). USS. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Richardson, No. 3:17-CV-2271-L, 2019 WL 1115059, at *4 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 11, 2019) (citing Powell v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC, No. 4:16-CV-251, 2017 WL 191261, at *2 (E.D. Tex., Jan. 18, 2017)); see Schmelzer v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, No. 4:16-CV-389, 2016 WL 4368735, *1 (ED. Tex. August 16, 2016). 20130376,20200799/38996}3,) Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 4 of 6 Finance LP is the mortgage servicer and not the mortgagee. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants contend that Selene Finance LP is the mortgagee, therefore Selene Finance LP is, at most, a nominal party or is improperly joined and its citizenship is not counted for diversity purposes. B. Amount in Controversy 10. This case places an amount in controversy that exceeds the $75,000 threshold. The property securing the loan at issue is identified by its address of 2515 Willow Springs Lane, Sugar Land, Texas 77479 (the “Property”).” Per the Fort Bend County Appraisal District, the tax appraised value of the collateral at issue for 2020 is no less than $233,760.00.° 11. Among other things, the Complaint purportedly seeks declaratory and injunctive relief seeking to preclude Trustee from exercising its contractual and legal right to foreclose on the Property which serves as collateral for first lien indebtedness owed to Trustee.! 12. In this case, it is apparent from the Complaint that the jurisdictional threshold is satisfied by the request for injunctive relief pertaining to the subject loan and Property. 13, Federal jurisdiction can be established by facts alleged in the petition for removal that support a conclusion that the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied.'? “In actions seeking declaratory or injunctive relief, it is well established that the amount in controversy is 13 measured by the value of the object of the litigation. 14, “[W]hen the validity of a contract or a right to property is called into question in its entirety, the value of the property controls the amount in controversy.”!* “[T]he amount in controversy, in an action for declaratory or injunctive relief, is the value of the right to be protected 9 See Complaint at 8. 10 See Exhibit D. 1 See Complaint at { 34 and § 37 and Prayer. 2 Menendez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 364 Fed. Appx. 62, 66, 2010 WL 445470, 2 (5th Cir. 2010) (unpublished) (citing Garcia v. Koch Oil Co. of Texas, Inc., 351 F.3d 636, 638-39 (Sth Cir. 2003)). 13 Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Adver. Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333, 347, 97 S. Ct. 2434, 53 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1977). “ Waller v. Prof'l Ins. Corp., 296 F.2d 545, 547-48 (Sth Cir. 1961). 4 20130376,20200799/3899613.1 Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document 1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 5 of 6 or the extent of the injury to be prevented.”!> Also, where a party seeks to quiet title or undo a foreclosure, the object of the litigation is the property at issue and the amount in controversy is measured by the value of the property.!° 15. Plaintiff filed this action for the purpose of precluding foreclosure and seeks injunctive relief precluding foreclosure.!’ In addition to seeking unspecified money damages, based on the foregoing the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction is met. Vv. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff has made no known jury demand in the State Court Action. Vi. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendants ask the Court to remove this suit to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Respectfully submitted, HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C. By:_/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. State Bar No. 00784294 Federal LD. No. 16035 Eric C. Mettenbrink State Bar No. 24043819 Federal I.D. No. 569887 1415 Louisiana, 36" Floor Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 220-9182 Telephone (713) 223-9319 Facsimile mhord@hirschwest.com emettenbrink@hirschwest.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 15 Webb v. Investacorp, Inc., 89 F.3d 252 (5th Cir. 1996), citing Leininger v. Leininger, 705 F.2d 727 (Sth Cir. 1983). 16 See Berry v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 2009 WL 2868224, at *2 (S.D. Tex. August 27, 2009). 7 See Complaint Generally and Prayer. 5 20130376.20200799/3899613.) Case 4:20-cv-04177 Document1 Filed on 12/08/20 in TXSD Page 6 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 8 day of December 2020, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Removal was served as follows: Karen P. Kealy Kealy Law Firm, PLLC 11811 N. Frwy, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77060 Via Email and U.S. Regular Mail /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. 20130376.20200799/3899613.1