Johal v. U.S. Life Ins. Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Williams-Sullivan v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am.

    No. CV-20-00315-PHX-SMB (D. Ariz. Nov. 20, 2020)

    Where there is nothing specifically missing from the record that would render the initial denial letter deficient, a plan administrator does not run afoul of § 2560.503-1(g)(1)(iii) by declining to note specific information that a plaintiff needs to perfect a claim. Johal v. United States Life Ins. Co. in City of New York, No. CV-20-00204-PHX-JAT, 2020 WL 6074248, at *3 (D. Ariz. Oct. 15, 2020) (finding no deficiency under § 2560.503-1(g)(1)(iii) because the administrator, having considered all the evidence, concluded that it needed no more and that the claimant was not disabled). Prudential's initial denial letter states that if Plaintiff chooses to appeal, the appeal should contain:

  2. Stratton v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am.

    20-CV-2037 JLS (NLS) (S.D. Cal. Jul. 14, 2021)

    If the Court determines supplementation of the administrative record is appropriate, why should the Court not remand this matter to the plan administrator for an initial determination? See, e.g., Mongeluzo v. Baxter Travenol Long Term Disability Ben. Plan, 46 F.3d 938, 944 (9th Cir. 1995) (citation omitted); Johal v. U.S. Life Ins. Co. in City of New York, 494 F.Supp.3d 644, 648 (D. Ariz. 2020) (citation omitted). 4.