Dahiya was injured while working onboard a vessel owned by Talmidge, pursuant to an employment contract, the Deed, with Neptune Shipmanagement Services (PTE), Ltd. He then sued Talmidge, Neptune, and other Vessel Interests in state court. The Vessel Interests removed the lawsuit to the Eastern District of Louisiana under the New York Convention, and moved to compel Dahiya to arbitrate pursuant to the terms of the Deed. Dahiya moved to remand, and his motion was granted. The Fifth Circuit held that an order remanding a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was unreviewable, "no matter how erroneous". The District Court subsequently observed that its remand ruling had been erroneous. The present decision concerned the Vessel Interest's renewed removal of the case to federal court, and Dahiya's argument that, while the Court did have subject matter jurisdiction under the New York Convention, the removal was procedurally improper because it was both untimely and an impermissible "re-removal". The Court held instead that removal was timely and that re-removal was permissible. On the same day, the Court rendered a decision in a related case, Neptune v. Dahiya.