Rodolff

ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [Docket No. 92]; (2) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Docket No. 15]; (3) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Docket No. 80]; and (4) DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE [Docket No. 99]

On May 3, 2001, Plaintiff David J. Ro-dolff filed a complaint against Defendants Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, Northrop Voluntary Accidental Death and Dismemberment Plan for Employees of Northrop Grumman Corporation, and Does 1 through 10 (collectively, “Provident” or “Defendants”), as a result of Provident’s denial of benefits to Plaintiff under a group accidental death and dismemberment policy governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. On September 26, 2001, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 5, 2002, the court issued an order determining that the decision of the administrator denying benefits should be reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. Thereafter the court afforded the parties an opportunity to evaluate the case under the abuse of discretion standard, and ordered…