under it. Rather, he hopes to recover damages for injuries he suffered as a result of Texas Aggregates’ alleged breach of its duty to provide him with a safe workplace. His cause of action would exist, in precisely the same form as it was pleaded in state court, even if there were no such thing as the Texas Aggregates ERISA plan. ERISA does not preempt such claims. Because ERISA does not preempt Woods’s state law negligence claim, his complaint raises no federal question, so the district court was without jurisdiction. The orders denying remand, compelling arbitration, and dismissing are VACATED, and this matter is REMANDED to the district court with instruction that it be remanded to state court. 1 . See Arana v. Ochsner Health Plan, 338 F.3d 433, 438-40 (5th Cir.2003) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). 2 . The order denying remand addresses only
holding that fehbas complete preemption provision closely resembles erisas express preemption provision and precedent interpreting the erisa provision thus provides authority for cases involving the fehba provision recognizing limits on the erisa preemption clause holding that  502a operated to preempt state law claims despite the fact that the law in question may have been exempt from  514a preemption as a law regulating insurance holding removal and preemption are distinct concepts erisa preemption does not allow removal unless complete preemption exists holding that  502a may serve as an independent basis for preemption where  514a the blanket erisa preemption provision is inapplicable