Takata v. Hartford Comprehensive Employee Benefit Service Co.

MEMORANDUM

Debbie Takata appeals from the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of defendants in her action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

Hartford terminated Takata’s disability-benefits after it recorded surveillance videos showing Takata engaging in activities, such as teaching martial arts classes, that were inconsistent with her statements and reported symptoms.

1. Takata did not produce any evidence to rebut defendants’ declarations that Hartford (not Battelle) administered her plan, even though she had been given the opportunity to conduct discovery on the matter. Therefore, there was no conflict of interest and we accordingly apply the deferential abuse of discretion standard of review to Hartford’s termination decision.

2. Given the video, Hartford’s failure to provide detailed reasons distinguishing its benefits decision from that of the Social Security Administration does not compel a conclusion that Hartford abused its discretion. See, e.g., Montour v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 588 F.3d 623, 635 (9th Cir.2009).

3. Hartford’s…