Fields
Fields v. Standard Insurance
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Linda Fields appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Standard Insurance Company (“Standard”), in her action alleging that Standard violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) by denying her claim for long-term disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U. S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s application of the abuse of discretion standard and its conclusion that a plan fiduciary has not abused its discretion. See Lang v. Long-Term Disability Plan of Sponsor Applied Remote Tech., 125 F.3d 794 , 797 (9th Cir.1997).
Upon review of the record, we conclude that the district court properly determined that defendant did not abuse its discretion by terminating Fields’ benefits, see Atwood v. Newmont Gold Co., Inc., 45 F.3d 1317, 1323-25 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.
Fields failed to establish that the administrator operated under a conflict of *947 interest because she did not provide “material, probative evidence” that the fiduciary’s self interest caused a breach of the administrator’s fiduciary obligation to the beneficiary. See Lang, 125 F.3d at 798.