With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". at sea. See generally Mitchell v. Trawler Racer Inc., 362 U.S. 539, 550, 80 S.Ct. 926, 4 L.Ed.2d 941 (1960). A claim for maintenance & cure concerns the vessel owner’s obligation to provide food, lodging, and medical services to a seaman injured while serving on the ship. See generally Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor, 303 U.S. 525, 527-28, 58 S.Ct. 651, 82 L.Ed. 993 (1938). 2 . In relevant part, 46 U.S.C.App. § 688(a) provides that "[a]ny seaman who s nes Act is removable from state to federal court. See Burchett v. Cargill, Inc., 48 F.3d 173 (5th Cir.1995). However, no allegations of fraud exist in this case. 4 . A number of district courts have addressed the issue as well and concur with the Second and Fifth Circuit's holdings. See In re Waterman Steamship Corp., 1992 WL 124819 (E.D.La.)(<HOLDING>); See also Lonthier v. Northwest Ins. Co., 599

A: holding that general maritime law preempts state law
B: holding that joinder of a nonremovable jones act claim with a removable claim under general maritime law that is not separate and independent is not grounds for removal
C: holding that wrongful death actions asserted under admiralty jurisdiction lie under general maritime law for death caused by violation of maritime duties and are not limited to standards of liability created by state law
D: holding that although claims asserted under the general maritime law of unseaworthiness are removable when diversity exists they cannot be removed when combined with a claim under the jones act
D.