MVA. AGA notes that the forum selection clause, by its own terms, only applies to actions arising from the MVA. CSK’s alleged breach, however, is of the five-year business term contained within the 2003 Agreement. According to AGA, this means that 2003 Agreement, which has no forum selection clause, is the contract applicable to this lawsuit. “[A]ll disputes the resolution of which arguably depend on the construction of an agreement ‘arise out of that agreement for purposes of determining the applicability of a forum selection clause.” Omron Healthcare, Inc. v. Maclaren Exp. Ltd., 28 F.3d 600, 603 (7th Cir.1994) (citing Sweet Dreams Unlimited, Inc. v. Dial-A-Mattress Int’l, Ltd., 1 F.3d 639, 642-43 (7th Cir.1993)); see also Hugel v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 999 F.2d 206, 209 (7th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the question before the court is
holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur holding that the federal claims which arose from state court criminal contempt proceedings were inextricably intertwined with the state court action and thus the federal district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims pursuant to the rookerfeldman doctrine holding plaintiffs supervisor subject to suit holding that the plaintiffs claims arose from a certain contract because the subject matter of the plaintiffs suit was intertwined with requirements referred to in the contract holding an administrative rule referred to in the contract became part of the contract under the doctrine of incorporation