JANIS GRAHAM JACK, United States District Judge
On this day came on to be considered Defendant Honeywell International, Inc.'s ("Honeywell") Application and Notice of Removal in the above-styled action. For the reasons stated herein, the Court issues a sua sponte remand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c) and/or § 1452(b) to the 148th Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas, where the case was originally filed and assigned Cause Number 00-6526-E.
The claims asserted against Honeywell in this case, as well as in numerous other cases, have been removed based on alleged "related to" jurisdiction under the Bankruptcy Code. Essentially, Honeywell claims that this Court has "related to" jurisdiction over the claims based upon claims for contribution and indemnification by and among Honeywell and a co-defendant (Federal-Mogul, Inc. and various of its affiliates and subsidiaries) who filed for protection pursuant to reorganization under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code, in bankruptcy. Honeywell is a nondebtor co-defendant. It has come to this Court's attention that the state court case of which the instant removed claims are a part is the same case that was removed in its entirety to this Court by another one of Honeywell's co-defendants (Garlock, Inc.) in Cause Number C-01-482. In Cause Number C-01-482, pursuant to Plaintiffs' agreement to dismiss with prejudice the Debtor Defendant, the Court entered an order (1) dismissing with prejudice the Debtor; (2) providing that any and all possible claims remaining against the Debtor were to be severed and transferred to the District Court in Delaware pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(5); and (3) remanding all remaining claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c) and/or § 1452(b) to the 148th Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas, where the case was originally filed and assigned Cause Number 00-6526-E. Garlock appealed this Court's Order, and the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion affirming this Court's treatment of the case on January 2, 2002.
The Court is aware that Honeywell only removed the portion of the state court case in which it is involved. However, when Garlock removed the same state court case, the removal was of the entire case. This Court has, therefore, resolved all issues pertaining to the entire case in its earlier orders in Cause Number C-01-482.
Garlock had filed Motions for Stay on executions of remand in various cases under Fed.R.App.P. 8. The Fifth Circuit addressed the merits of Garlock's appeal, dissolved the temporary stays it had earlier issued, and denied Garlock's Motions for Stay under Fed.R.App.P. 8.
For the reasons stated in this Court's Order in Cause Number C-01-482 (entered on November 9, 2001) and in the Fifth Circuit's opinion in Billy Arnold, Jr., et al. v. Garlock, Inc., (Nos. 01-41327 through 41335, No. 01-41366 (consolidated), No. 01-11481 (consolidated), No. 01-51209 (consolidated), No. 01-51241 (consolidated)) (5th Cir. December 28, 2001), the Court ORDERS that the above-styled cause of action be REMANDED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c) and/or § 1452(b) to the 148th Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas, where the case was originally filed and assigned Cause Number 00-6526-E.