FILED April 28, 2023 No. 22-30168 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Kholkar Vishveshwar Ganpat,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus Eastern Pacific Shipping PTE, Limited, doing business as EPS,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC 2:18-CV-13556

Before Jones, Ho, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. James C. Ho, Circuit Judge: Litigating in a foreign country can be fraught with peril. The basic procedural and substantive protections guaranteed litigants in American courts are often taken for granted here—yet sharply limited or missing entirely before tribunals in foreign lands. This case provides a vivid illustration: An individual brings tort and contract claims in federal court in Louisiana against a foreign corporation. In response, the corporation evades service and brings a countersuit in India, No. 22-30168

before a court where the individual lacks counsel and is instead forced to take legal advice from the corporation’s own attorneys. Predictably, the corporation’s attorneys act in direct conflict with the individual’s interests. The corporation’s attorneys not only pressure him to settle—they even manage to convince the foreign court to place him in prison, based on a bizarre claim that the individual does not object to imprisonment without bail while the case is pending. In response to these alarming developments abroad, the federal district court in Louisiana unsurprisingly enters an anti-suit injunction to prevent the foreign corporation from litigating the same issues simultaneously before the court in India. Our circuit precedents have long authorized district courts to enter anti-suit injunctions like the one entered here. See, e.g., Bethell v. Peace, 441 F.2d 495, 498 (5th Cir. 1971). And our review of such anti-suit injunctions is limited to abuse of discretion. See Kaepa, Inc. v. Achilles Corp., 76 F.3d 624, 626 (5th Cir. 1996). Finding no abuse, we affirm. I. Kholkar Vishveshwar Ganpat, a citizen of India, worked as a crew member on the Stargate, a merchant ship managed by the Singapore-based shipping company Eastern Pacific. When the Stargate stopped at Savannah, Georgia, in spring 2017, Eastern Pacific allegedly failed to stock up on anti- malarial medicine, despite warnings that the supply was low. Ganpat then contracted malaria in Gabon, the Stargate’s next stop—and a predictably high-risk area for malaria. When the Stargate arrived at Rio de Janeiro, the stop after Gabon, Ganpat went to the hospital, where his gangrenous toes— a complication of malaria—were amputated.

2 No. 22-30168

In December 2018, Ganpat brought suit against Eastern Pacific in the Eastern District of Louisiana, alleging tort claims under the Jones Act and general maritime law, as well as contract claims arising from a collective bargaining agreement. Eastern Pacific waived objections to personal jurisdiction and venue. However, “[o]ver a period of approximately two and a half years, [Ganpat] attempted multiple times to perfect service upon Eastern Pacific,” but the corporation “did not accept service, and, instead, filed several motions to dismiss [Ganpat’s] claims . . . for insufficient service of process.” Ganpat v. E. Pac. Shipping, PTE. LTD, No. CV 18-13556