Brand Tarzana Surgical Institute, Inc. v. International Longshore & Warehouse Union-Pacific Maritime Ass'n Welfare Plan

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Brand Tarzana Surgical Institute, Inc. appeals the district court’s order partially dismissing its case and granting summary judgment to Appellee International Longshore and Welfare Union-Pacific Maritime Association Welfare Plan (the Plarl). For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM the district court.

Brand claims that it has authority to pursue ERISA benefits because of assignments from plan participants and beneficiaries. Brand’s argument fails because an assignment is not valid where prohibited by unambiguous plan language like an anti-assignment provision. Davidowitz v. Delta Dental Plan of Cal., Inc., 946 F.2d 1476 , 1478 (9th Cir. 1991). The Plan’s language unambiguously states that Plan benefits are not subject to assignment and any attempt to do so shall be void.

The Plan’s clauses regarding the direction to pay benefits directly to the provider do not contradict the anti-assignment of benefits clause. The direct payment clauses appear to give Plan beneficiaries the right to insist that the Plan make payments directly to providers. However, nothing about the direct payment clauses suggests that providers, rather than beneficiaries, are entitled to…