Legal Opinion

Barnes v. AT & T Pension Benefit Plannonbargained Program

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 22, 2010No. C 08-04058 MHPPublishedCited by 150 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

MARILYN HALL PATEL, District Judge.

Re: Plaintiff Barnes’ Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses

In this action, plaintiff Quiller Barnes (“Barnes”), on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, alleges that defendant AT & T Pension Benefit Plan Nonbargained Program (“AT & T”) wrongfully denied him pension benefits to which he was entitled. Barnes’ amended complaint asserts three causes of action under the Employee Retirement and Income Security Act (“ERISA”) for: (1) failing to provide adequate notice of the reasons for benefit denial, 29 U.S.C. § 1133(1); (2)…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Mladen Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by150 opinions

  1. In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
  2. Kohler v. Islands Restaurants, LPDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2012
  3. Lane v. PageDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2011
  4. Kohler v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013
  5. Rosen v. Masterpiece Marketing Group, LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2016

145 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API