Remand
Remand sends a removed case back to the district court or county court at law where it started. In the Texas Business Court it is mandatory: section 25A.006(d) requires remand whenever the court determines it lacks jurisdiction. No statute authorizes an interlocutory appeal from the order, and a remand is not a final judgment, so it cannot be appealed directly. Any review would have to come by mandamus.
Removal to the Texas Business Court is easy to start and hard to undo. Any party to an action filed in a district court or county court at law may remove it if the case is within the business court's jurisdiction, unless the action was filed in a county of proper venue that is not within an operating division. Co-party consent is not required. Compare federal practice, where in a case removed solely under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) every properly joined and served defendant must join in or consent to removal. Texas dispensed with that.
The deadline
Tex. Gov't Code § 25A.006(f) gives thirty days, measured from the later of service on the removing party or the date that party discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, the facts establishing the business court's jurisdiction. The discovery trigger is generous and dangerous in equal measure. It rescues a defendant who learns during discovery that the transaction cleared the threshold. It also means a defendant sitting on documents in its own files showing an $8 million deal will struggle to argue it could not reasonably have discovered anything. An agreed notice of removal may be filed at any time. If an application for temporary injunction is pending when the removing party discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the jurisdictional facts, the thirty days run instead from the date the application is granted or denied under § 25A.006(f)(2).
Remand is mandatory
Under § 25A.006(d), if the business court determines that it does not have jurisdiction over a removed action, it shall remand the action to the court in which it was originally filed. There is no discretionary retention and no economy-of-litigation doctrine that saves a case sitting under the threshold. Two 2025 remands show the mechanics. Black Mountain SWD v. NGL Water Solutions Permian, 2025 Tex. Bus. 24 (8th Div. June 30, 2025), turned on unpaid royalties that fell short of the amount-in-controversy threshold. G-Force & Associates v. Bloecher, 2025 Tex. Bus. 18 (8th Div. May 14, 2025), turned on construction bids not being a qualified transaction. Both were decided under the $10 million thresholds that applied before H.B. 40 lowered them to $5 million, effective September 1, 2025.
You cannot appeal it
The Fifteenth Court of Appeals answered this twice on the same day. ETC Field Services v. TEMA Oil and Gas, No. 15-24-00124-CV (Tex. App.—15th Dist. Feb. 21, 2025), and Synergy Global v. Hinduja Global, No. 15-24-00127-CV (Tex. App.—15th Dist. Feb. 21, 2025), both held that a business court remand order cannot be appealed. The reasoning is short and hard to get around. Interlocutory appeals in Texas exist only where a statute authorizes them, and no statute authorizes one from a remand order. A remand order is also not a final judgment, because it does not dispose of the claims. It relocates them.
So the party who wants the business court has no direct appeal from a remand. ETC also filed a mandamus petition, and the court did not need to decide whether to treat its appeal as one. Under Tex. R. Civ. P. 355(b), the notice of removal itself must plead facts establishing the business court's authority and venue.