When the complaint does not allege facts disclosing the amount in controversy, a defendant removing the case under CAFA need only allege facts that plausibly show that the case satisfies CAFA’s jurisdictional requirements, including the amount in controversy. The notice of removal need not cite evidence supporting the allegations of those jurisdictional facts. The plaintiff can challenge the notice of removal facially or factually. A facial challenge, like a demurrer, admits the notice’s factual allegations but asserts they are legally insufficient; whereas, a factual challenge asserts the notice’s allegations are factually incorrect. Here, plaintiff raised only a facial challenge. So it was error for the district oourt to remand on the ground that the defendant’s declaration in opposition to the remand motion stated general conclusions not supported by any business records. On a facial challenge, the defendant need not submit any evidence but can rest on the notice’s allegations, if they are legally sufficient.