In Abogado v. Int'l Marine Carriers, 890 F. Supp. 626 (S.D. Tex. 1995) the court allowed a plaintiff to pursue his suit for punitive damages against the private operator of a vessel owned by the United States for the operator's failure to pay him maintenance and cure benefits. Abogado, 890 F. Supp. at 631. The court found it significant that the plaintiff's punitive damages claim did not arise from "any action that occurred in the operation of the vessel." Id. at 632. Instead, the plaintiff premised his claim on allegations that the private vessel operator's employees, who were responsible for administering insurance benefits, had willfully withheld maintenance and cure benefits from him. Id. The court allowed the claims; it reasoned that "such office-based, administrative action" by the vessel operator could not "realistically be said to be part of the possession or operation of merchant vessels." Id. The court agreed with the plaintiff that the punitive damages claim was not part of the same subject matter as the plaintiff's general maintenance and cure claims, which could be asserted against the United States. See id. Thus, the punitive damages claim was not covered by the exclusivity provision. See id. at 631, 634.