Kolano

MEMORANDUM *

Christine Kolano appeals from the district court’s refusal to overturn the denial of her claim for disability benefits as untimely.

The district court granted judgment in Met Life’s favor, holding, among other things, that Kolano failed to rebut an Iowa state law presumption of prejudice to Met Life. We disagree. Assuming without deciding that the Iowa version of the notice-prejudice rule is not preempted as applied to ERISA plans, cf. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Ward, 526 U.S. 358, 363 , 119 S.Ct. 1380 , 143 L.Ed.2d 462 (1999), we reverse. In doing so, we express no opinion as to the merits of Kolano’s LTD benefits claim. We only hold that Met Life was not prejudiced by her untimely notice, and *675 that the district court clearly erred in concluding otherwise.

In considering an insured’s compliance with the notice provision of an insurance contract, the Iowa Supreme Court has stated:

Grinnell Mut. Reins. Co. v. Jungling, 654 N.W.2d 530, 541-42 (Iowa 2002) (internal citations omitted). Applying this standard, Kolano met her burden of rebutting the presumption of prejudice to Met Life.

First, Kolano submitted medical records from the time during which she was…