Kim

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant raises two issues on appeal. First, she claims that the district court erred in finding that she failed to show futility of exhaustion on her ERISA § 502 claims. We review that decision for an abuse of discretion. See Diaz v. United Agrie. Employee Welfare Benefit Plan & Trust, 50 F.3d 1478 , 1483 (9th Cir.1995) (citing Amato v. Bernard, 618 F.2d 559, 569 (9th Cir.1980)). Under that standard of review, “this court cannot reverse the district court’s ruling unless it has a definite and firm conviction that the lower court committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon a weighing of the relevant factors.” Marx v. Loral Corp., 87 F.3d 1049, 1054 (9th Cir.1996).

Although we understand and appreciate Appellant’s arguments, upon a review of the record, we cannot conclude that the district court committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon a weighing of the relevant factors. See id. On the contrary, the district court analyzed the undisputed evidence presented and decided, based on existing authority, that Appellant had failed to show that she was entitled to invoke the futility exception. That decision was…