Roettker
Roettker v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEVEN ROETTKER, Case No.: 24-cv-343-RSH-AHG
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
v. MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
OF AMERICA,
[ECF No. 24] Defendant. 16 17 18 Pending before the Court is plaintiff Steven Roettker’s motion to supplement the administrative record. ECF No. 24. The motion has been fully briefed. ECF Nos. 25, 26. For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff is a participant in an employee benefit plan, regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), that was sponsored by his former employer. ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 4, 5. The plan provided disability benefits through a group insurance company issued by defendant Unum Life Insurance Company of America. Id. ¶ 7. Defendant is also the claims administrator under the plan. Id. ¶ 14. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit…