As such, this is a core matter as it pertains to the confirmation of a plan in a chapter 13 proceeding. § 157(b)(2)(L); see also In Re Southmark Corp., 163 F.3d 925, 930 (5th Cir. 1999). This Court may only hear a case in which venue is proper. 28 U.S.C. § 1408. According to the petition, Debtors reside in Donna, Texas. [ECF No. 1]. Therefore, venue is proper in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, McAllen Division. B. Constitutional Authority to Enter a Final Order This Court has an independent duty to evaluate whether it has the constitutional authority to sign a final order. Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011). But see Wellness Int’l Network v. Sharif, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1932, 1938-39, 191 L.Ed.2d 911 (2015) (<HOLDING>). Having determined that the instant case
holding that a federal court may refuse to exercise continuing jurisdiction even though the parties have agreed to it parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation or consent holding that lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by consent holding that in bankruptcyrelated matters any one party may remove the state court action without the consent of the other parties holding that parties may consent to jurisdiction on noncore matters holding that parties may stipulate to facts from which jurisdiction may be inferred