forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), and because it was not, the court must order remand. Last, plaintiff seeks default judgment because defendants have not filed an answer in the time provided under Fed.R.Civ.P. 81. The main issue is whether defendants’ procedural failures require this court to remand the case to state court or whether to allow defendants to cure these defects. 1. Failure to Attach Process Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (2006), there are “two types of improperly removed cases: those in which the federal court has no subject matter jurisdiction and those with defects in the removal procedure itself.” Huffman v. Saul Holdings, Ltd. P’ship, 194 F.3d 1072, 1076 (10th Cir.1999). A defect in subject matter jurisdiction is never waived and can be raised at any time. Id. (7th Cir.1967) (<HOLDING>); Covington v. Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 251
holding that the district court did not have jurisdiction and remanding the matter to state court holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts holding that any defect in removal procedure must be cured within the 30day removal period or it is fatal to the removal and defendants failure to attach exhibits to the notice of removal within that time required remand holding that a defendants failure to attach process to its notice of removal was not fatal and did not require remand holding that defendants failure to attach a copy of the complaint to its notice of removal did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction and stating that to permit this minor irregularity to defeat the district courts jurisdiction would be to elevate form over substance