10. Does Sinochem foreclose an appeals court from determining whether a district court had subject-matter jurisdiction in an action removed to federal court and then dismissed on grounds of forum non conveniens? The Ninth Circuit, observing that the suit in Sinochemwas originally filed in the federal court, has held that it does not:

In Sinochem, the Supreme Court offered the lower courts a practical mechanism for resolving a case that would ultimately be dismissed. For a case originally filed in federal court, the result would be the same, whether dismissed on jurisdictional or forum non conveniens grounds dismissal would be inevitable and conclusive. For a case originating in state court, however, the difference could be significant. If the federal court dismisses on forum non conveniens grounds, the case is dismissed. But if removal is improper, the case is remanded to the state court. Thus, in a removal scenario, the sequencing of the decision may have practical consequences.

Provincial Gov’t of Marinduque v. Placer Dome, Inc., 582 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2009).