granting certiorari on the questions "Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in holding . . . that the fact that a claim administrator of an ERISA plan also funds the plan benefits, without more, constitutes a "conflict of interest" which must be weighed in a judicial review of the administrator's benefit determination . . .?" and "If an administrator that both determines and pays claims under an ERISA plan is deemed to be operating under a conflict of interest, how should that conflict be taken into account on judicial review of a discretionary benefit determination?"

In MetLife, the Supreme Court accepted certiorari to determine the appropriate standard of review when "an administrator that both determines and pays claims under an ERISA plan is deemed to be operating under a conflict of interest."