Microsoft provides compensation to executives in the form of a variety of incentive compensation plans, including restricted stock award grants. The following is an excerpt from a disclosure note from Microsoft's 2017 annual report: Note 20 Employee Stock and Savings Plans (in part) Stock awards are grants that entitle the holder to shares of common stock as the award vests. Our stock awards generally vest over a five-year period. . . . During fiscal year 2017, the following activity occurred under our plans: Shares ($ in millions) Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value Stock awards: Nonvested balance, beginning of year 194 $ 36.92 Granted 84 55.64 Assumed in acquisitions 23 59.09 Vested (80 ) 37.36 Forfeited (20 ) 43.71 Nonvested balance, end of year 201 $ 46.32 Required: If all awards are granted, acquired, vested, and forfeited evenly throughout the year, what is the compensation expense in fiscal 2017 pertaining to the previous and current stock awards

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.