Fisher
Fisher v. Aetna Life Insurance
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Calvin and Penny Fisher appeal the district court’s decision to remand to the ERISA plan administrator, Aetna Life Insurance Company, for determination of the Fishers’ entitlement to accidental death benefits. We lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s remand order.
The district court had jurisdiction over this ERISA action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (e)(1). Courts of appeals, however, have jurisdiction solely over appeals from “final decisions of the district courts of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Under our precedent, an order remanding to an ERISA plan administrator is only final and appealable when:
*610 Banuelos v. Constr. Laborers’ Trust Funds for S. Cal., 382 F.3d 897, 903 (9th Cir.2004); see also Hensley v. N.W. Permanente P.C. Ret. Plan & Trust, 258 F.3d 986 , 993 (9th Cir.2001); Rendleman v. Shalala, 21 F.3d 957 , 959 n. 1 (9th Cir. 1994).
This three-factor test has not been met here. First, the district court did not decide any separable legal issue. The district court simply declined to rule on an issue the plan administrator did not reach, namely whether benefits were due under the correct plan, and remanded for the plan…