With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to the plaintiffs claims. Thus, even where a party “is not technically suing for breach of' contract,” the forum selection clause can still apply if “the entire controversy centers around which party’s interpretation of the contract is thé correct one.” Int’l Software Sys., Inc. v. Amplicon, Inc., 77 F.3d 112, 116 (5th Cir.1996). That quite accurately describes this dispute. Plaintiffs ' argue, with colorable support, that the October 2014 Settlement Agreement released them from claims such as those in the Kentucky Action. (ECF No. 14 at 11-19.) Vine contends the opposite. (ECF No. 23 at 19-24.) The correct interpretation of the October 2014 Settlement Agreement is therefore directly at issue. See also John Wyeth & Bro. Ltd. v. CIGNA Int’l Corp., 119 F.3d 1070, 1076 (3d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>).' 3. The Second Amended Kentucky Complaint The

A: holding that contract promise to litigate any dispute arising from the contract in the english courts was prima facie valid quoting underlying contract
B: holding that a forum selection clause was not enforceable against defendants that were not parties to the contract
C: holding that the arbitration agreement in a written contract did not apply to a dispute arising from a subsequent oral agreement which did not incorporate the arbitration clause from the written contract
D: holding that a broadly worded forum selection clause extending to any dispute arising  in relation to  the contract easily encompasses a dispute in which the contract is raised as a defense
D.