ROGER TITUS, District Judge
Upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Remand [Paper no. 9] and the opposition thereto, the Defendant's Motion to Amend Notice of Removal [Paper no. 16] and the opposition thereto, it is, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, this 26th day of April, 2006, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
ORDERED, that Defendant's Motion to Amend Notice of Removal [Paper no. 16] is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk Docket Defendant's Proposed Amended Notice of Removal [Paper no. 17] as Defendants' Amended Notice of Removal; and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Motion to Remand [Paper no. 9] is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Defendant shall file a response to the Complaint on or before May 8, 2006.