The district court’s transmittal of its remand order to the state court from which the action had been removed does not deprive the Court of Appeals of appellate jurisdiction to review the remand order.  Also, 28 USC 1447(d) does not block review unless the remand is granted on one of the grounds allowed under 28 USC 1447(c)–i.e., lack of subject matter jurisdiction or a defect in removal procedure.  Even if the remand order recites one of those grounds, the Court of Appeals can review the order to see whether the stated reason for remand is “colorable.”  Here, the stated ground, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, was not colorable because the district court determined the issue sua sponte based solely on the notice of removal’s allegations without giving the defendant an opportunity to present evidence to prove that the $75,000 threshold for diversity jurisdiction was satisfied.  The notice of removal need not contain evidentiary allegations to support jurisdiction.  If its allegations are challenged, the defendant must be given a chance to prove, with evidence, that the jurisdictional requirements are satisfied.  Since the district court had not given defendant that opportunity, it had no authority (at that stage) to remand the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.