(1) Whether, as the Ninth Circuit held, but contrary to the views of three other circuits, a defendant who disagrees with the Attorney General's timely state-court filing under section 233(l)(1) may remove the action to federal district court to review the correctness of that filing, despite the absence of any statutory basis for removal.

(2) Whether, as the Ninth Circuit held, but in direct conflict with a decision of the Third Circuit, section 233(l)(1) requires the Attorney General to remove any state court action against an entity that had prospectively been deemed a PHS employee for some purposes, without consideration as to whether the specific case falls within the scope of any such deeming.

Whether a defendant who disagrees with the Attorney General's state-court filing may remove the action to federal district court without a statutory basis for removal, and whether the Attorney General must remove any state court action against an entity deemed a PHS employee without considering the specific case's scope