Pete, a citizen of New York brings an action against Dick, in the U.S. District Court in New York (the judicial district in which Pete lives). Dick is a citizen of Michigan. The action alleges $80,000 in damages and is based on an alleged breach of contract by Dick to manufacture equipment for Pete's restaurants. Subsequently, Dick brings an action against Pete for $76,000 in a New York court of general jurisdiction for personal injuries suffered by Dick when he slipped on a banana peel while at Pete's restaurant in New York three weeks before the parties were initially introduced. Pete seeks to remove the state court action to the proper U.S. District Court.Which of the following statements is correct? 1. Dick's action may not be removed. 2. Assuming the state court action meets applicable subject matter jurisdiction requirements, it could be removed to the appropriate U.S. District Court in New York. 3. Dick was not required to assert his action in the original federal court litigation initiated by Pete, since it did not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence as Pete's action. Question 10Select one: a. 1 only b. 2 only c. 2 and 3 d. 3 only