Case ID: f-appx_180/html/0893-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jane DOE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 05-13895
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    May 18, 2006.
    Jonathan L. Gaines, Russo Appellate Firm, P.A., South Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    
      Rachel S. Cohen, Maltzman Forman, PA, Darren Wayne Friedman, Kaye, Rose & Partners, LLP, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before ANDERSON, BIRCH and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Jane Doe appeals the District Court’s order compelling arbitration in this case. We hold that the District Court did not err in compelling arbitration in the Philippines because there was an enforceable arbitration agreement between the parties, and it is not apparent that Doe is precluded from having her claims arbitrated in the Philippines. See Bautista v. Star Cruises, 396 F.3d 1289, 1302-03 (11th Cir.), cert. dismissed, — U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 2954, 162 L.Ed.2d 884 (2005). We do reserve jurisdiction to remand this case for trial if Doe’s claim that she has no forum to arbitrate all of her claims in the Philippines proves to be correct. See Acosta v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 303 F.Supp.2d 1327, 1332 (S.D.Fla.2003) (retaining jurisdiction to remand the action to a Florida state court in the event the Philippine tribunal rejected the claim).

AFFIRMED.