Confuse on graphing questions

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court.the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center.because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.

Decision alternatives should be identified before decision criteria are established. are limited to quantitative solutions are evaluated as a part of the problem definition stage. are best generated by brain-storming.

Ticker services began operations in 2015 and maintains long-term investments in available-for-sale securities. the year-end cost and fair values for its portfolio of these investments follow.portfolio of available-for-sale securities cost fair valuedecember 31, 2015 $ 369,060 $ 357,988 december 31, 2016 420,728 445,972 december 31, 2017 572,190 676,901 december 31, 2018 864,007 768,966 prepare journal entries to record each year-end fair value adjustment for these securities.calculation adjustment required to fair value adjustment.12/31/15 existing balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) required balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) adjustment required to fair value adjustment-afs (lt) 12/31/16 existing balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) required balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) adjustment required to fair value adjustment-afs (lt) 12/31/17 existing balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) required balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) adjustment required to fair value adjustment-afs (lt) 12/31/18 existing balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) required balance in fair value adjustment-afs (lt) adjustment required to fair value adjustment-afs (lt) record the year-end adjusting entry for the securities portfolio as of december 31, 2015.date general journal debit creditdec 31, 2015 record the year-end adjusting entry for the securities portfolio as of december 31, 2016.date general journal debit creditdec 31, 2016 record the year-end adjusting entry for the securities portfolio as of december 31, 2017.date general journal debit creditdec 31, 2017 record the year-end adjusting entry for the securities portfolio as of december 31, 2018.date general journal debit creditdec 31, 2018