The issue on this appeal was whether the district court was correct to grant Kelso’s motion to compel arbitration. Maersk appealed the district court’s order of 3 June 2009, contending that the scope of the relevant arbitration provision did not encompass actions for damage to cargo. Kelso cross-appealed insofar as the order granted Maersk’s motion to dismiss on the grounds of improper venue, arguing that, in granting the improper venue motion, the court decided a choice of law question that should have been left to arbitration.