Sands

facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will

properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,

Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).

When determining who is the beneficiary of a life insurance policy under

24-7237 California law, which applies here, courts use a two-step inquiry to give effect to

“the intent of the insured as expressed by the [beneficiary designation].” Metro.

Life Ins. Co. v. Galicia, No. 5:19-cv-01412-JWH-KKx, 2021 WL 5083439, at *

(C.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2021) (alteration in original) (quoting Beck v. W. Coast Life Ins.

Co., 38 Cal. 2d 643, 646-47 (1952)). First, a claimant asserting that she is the

designated beneficiary must come forward with evidence proving that she is the

designee. Id. Then, if a second claimant challenges the validity of the beneficiary

designation, the burden shifts to the second claimant to prove undue influence,

incapacity, or fraud. Id. (citations omitted); see Primerica Life Ins. Co. v. Spaid,

No. 2:16-CV-1201-RGK-AFM, 2016 WL 9223793, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 18,

2016).

At the first step, Sands presented the last recorded beneficiary…