Quezada

INTRODUCTION

20 In this ERISA action for disability benefits, defendants insurance plan administrator and 21 affiliated claim administrator move for summary judgment. The motion for summary judgment 22 is DENIED and the case is REMANDED FOR RECONSIDERATION.

STATEMENT

24 In essence, our facts are simple. Plaintiff Kelly Quezada left his employment due to back 25 pain. He sought and received disability benefits for several years before being denied. The 26 appeal of the denial failed. Quezada now brings this ERISA claim to reinstate his benefits. The 27 1. THE PLAN. 1 Genentech provided disability benefits to its employees through defendant insurance plan 2 administrator, U.S. Roche Health and Welfare Benefits VEBA Plan (“Roche”). Here, only the 3 long-term benefits plan is at issue. 4 Roche retained discretionary authority to administer the plan, interpret it, and delegate 5 duties under the plan (ROCHE02728–2729) (emphasis added): 6 The Plan Administrator has full discretion to interpret and 7 administer the Plan and each Component Plan [including the plan for disability benefits]. All actions, interpretations and decisions 8 of the Plan Administrator . . . shall…