In Re Fedex Ground Package System Inc., Cause No. 3:05-MD-527 RM.

• Decision Date: 28 June 2010
• Docket Number: MDL No. 1700.,Cause No. 3:05-MD-527 RM.
• Parties: In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Employment Practices Litigation. This Document Relates to: Carlene M. Craig, et al. v. Fed Ex Ground Package System, Inc., Civil No. 3:05-CV-530 RLM (KS).
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana

722 F.Supp.2d 1033

In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Employment Practices Litigation.

This Document Relates to:

Carlene M. Craig, et al. v. Fed Ex Ground Package System, Inc., Civil No. 3:05-CV-530 RLM (KS).

Cause No. 3:05-MD-527 RM.

MDL No. 1700.

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana,South Bend Division.

June 28, 2010.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

Donald R. Taylor, Taylor Dunham & Burgess LLP, Austin, TX, Beth A. Ross, Eleanor I. Morton, Leonard Carder LLP, San Francisco, CA, Lynn R. Faris, Eleanor I. Morton, Leonard Carder LLP, Oakland, CA, Peter J. Agostino, Anderson Agostino & Keller PC, South Bend, IN, Susan E. Ellingstad, Charles N. Nauen, Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP, Clayton D. Halunen PHV, Halunen & Associates, Minneapolis, MN, Anne T. Regan, J. Gordon Rudd, Zimmerman Reed PLLP, Barry S. Fagan, Darcie R. Brault, Dib Fagan and Brault PC, Royal Oak, MI, Robert K. Firsten, Abbott Nicholson PC, Detroit, MI, Robert E. McDaniel, McDaniel Law Offices, Concord, NH, Dan S. Smith, Dan Solomon Smith LLC, Orange, NJ, Peter W. Overs, Jr., Robert I. Harwood, Harwood Feffer LLP, New York, NY, Richard Tanenbaum, Brooklyn, NY, Matthew T. Tobin, Sioux Falls, SD, Alan M. Purdie, Purdie & Metz, Ridgeland, MS, Richard T. Phillips, Smith Phillips Mitchell & Scott, Batesville, MS, Jerald R. Cureton, Cureton Clark PC, Mt. Laurel, NJ, Donald B. Lewis Bala Cynwyd, PA, Philip Stephen Fuoco, Joseph A. Osefchen, The Law Firm of Philip Stephen Fuoco, Haddonfield, NJ, Lynn R. Faris, Leonard Carder LLP, Oakland, CA, Paula R. Markowitz, Markowitz & Richman, Philadelphia, PA, R. Christopher Gilreath, Gilreath & Associates, Memphis, TN, Joree Brownlow, Law Office of Joree G. Brownlow, Bartlett, TN, Joree Brownlow, Law Office of Joree G. Brownlow, Bartlett, TN, Gary F. Lynch, Carlson Lynch Ltd., New Castle, PA, R. Bruce Carlson, Carlson Lynch Ltd., Sewickley, PA, Daniel O. Myers, Richardson Patrick Westbrook & Brickman LLC, Mount Pleasant, SC, Jack D. Hilmes, Michael R. Reck, Kevin J. Driscoll, Finley Alt Smith Scharnberg Craig Hilmes & Gaffney PC, Des Moines, IA, Ginger A. Degroff, Tampa, FL, James A. Staack, Staack Simms & Hernandez PA, Clearwater, FL, George A. Barton, Law Offices of George A. Barton PC, Kansas City, MO, Charles W. Whetstone, Jr., Whetstone Meyers Perkins & Young, Cheryl F. Perkins, Columbia, SC, Jeffrey A. Bartos, Guerrieri Edmond Clayman & Bartos PC, Washington, DC, Soye Kim, Guerrieri Edmond Clayman & Bartos PC, Washington, DC, B. James Fitzpatrick, Fitzpatrick Spini & Swanston, Salinas, CA, William S. Hommel, Jr., Attorney at Law, Tyler, TX, Andrew J. Kahn PHV, McCracken Stemerman & Holsberry, Las Vegas, NV, Jacqueline Mezquita Fernandez, Miami, FL, J. Allen Brinkley, Brinkley & Chesnut, Huntsville, AL, Larry A. Golston, Jr., Beasley Allen Crow Methvin Portis & Miles PC, Montgomery, AL, Bruce H. Meizlish, Deborah R. Grayson, Meizlish & Grayson, Cincinnati, OH, Eileen S. Goodin, Barkan Neff Handelman Meizlish LLP, Columbus, IN, John S. Marshall, Marshall and Morrow LLC Columbus, OH, Harold L. Lichten, Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC, Boston, MA, Mary D. Walsh-Dempsey, Todd J. O'Malley, O'Malley & Langan PC, Scranton, PA, Monica Ferraro, Barkan Neff Handelman Meizlish LLP, Peter D. Winebrake, The Winebrake Law Firm LLC, Dresher, PA, Robert E Derose, II, Robert K. Handelman, Robert I. Harwood, Harwood Feffer LLP, Salvatore G. Gangemi, Gangemi Law Firm PC, New York, NY, Shannon Liss-Riordan, Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC, Mary Donne Peters, Michael J. Gorby, Gorby Peters & Associates, Atlanta, GA, Mark A. Friel, Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter PC, Portland, OR, Robert A. Garcin, Law Offices of Robert A. Garcin, Loveland, CO, for Plaintiffs.

Wesley Martin, pro se.

Devon Nugent, pro se.

Melissa Rohman, pro se.

Ralph Carl Veal, pro se.

Laron Jones, Baltimore, MD, pro se.

Edward J. Efkeman, Federal Express Corporation, Memphis, TN, C. Victor Pyle, III, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC, Columbia, SC, Chris A. Hollinger, Michael W. Kopp, Nora M. Puckett, Robin Dean, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, San Francisco, CA, Carla D. Macaluso, Jackson Lewis LLP, Jennifer Rygiel Boyd, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC, Morristown, NJ, Karen P. Kruse PHV, Aaron Roblan, Jackson Lewis LLP, Seattle, WA, Kenneth Lee Blalack, II, Robert G. Ames, John H. Beisner PHV, Aparna B. Joshi, Guy Brenner, Jeffrey S. Nestler, Kenneth Lee Blalack, II, Evelyn L. Becker PHV, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, DC, Michael J. Puma PHV, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA, R. Jay Taylor, Jr., Scopelitis Garvin Light Hanson & Feary PC, Indianapolis, IN, Jeffrey A. Trimarchi, Jennifer Lee Merzon, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Robert I. Harwood, Harwood Feffer LLP, New York, NY, Michael W. Garrison, Jr., Michael G. McGuinness, Lesley A. Pate, Victor H. Jih, Venable LLP, Cameron H. Biscay, Laura E. Robinson, Robert M. Schwartz PHV, Scott Voelz, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Patricia A. Sullivan, Edwards & Angell, Steve Dennis PHV, Reid & Dennis PC, Dallas, TX, Alison G. Fox, D. Lucetta Pope, Thomas J Brunner, Jr., Baker & Daniels, South Bend, IN, Kenneth E. Milam, Watkins & Eager, Jackson, MS, Robert James Penny, Wick Bramer Ukasick & Trautwein LLC, Fort Collins, CO, Steven Matthew Kelso, Wheeler Trigg Kennedy LLP, Denver, CO, for Defendants.

OPINION and ORDER

ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., District Judge.

This matter is before the court on FedEx's motion for partial summary judgment seeking dismissal of the plaintiffs' ERISA claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The plaintiff drivers brought this class action suit against FedEx pursuant to ERISA's denial of benefit provision, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B) (ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B)). They claim FedEx violated ERISA by misclassifying them as independent contractors instead of employees and so wrongfully denied them the right to participate in six different employee benefit plans. It's undisputed that the plaintiffs didn't exhaust their administrative remedies under the plan documents, but they assert they are excused from doing so because (1) they were denied meaningful access to administrate review, and (2) it would have been futile to bring their claims before FedEx or FedEx's designee when FedEx has consistently taken the position that the plaintiffs aren't entitled to any plan benefits. Because the court disagrees with plaintiffs that they were denied meaningful access to administrative review or that exhausting their administrative remedies would have been futile, the court GRANTS FedEx's motion for partial summary judgment and dismisses the plaintiffs' ERISA claims without prejudice.

Background

The plaintiffs have brought their ERISA claim for benefits under the following FedEx plans: 401(k) Plan; Group Life Insurance Benefits Plan; Ground Benefits Plus Short-Term Disability Plan; Ground Benefits Plus Long Term Disability Plan; FedEx Medical, Dental and Vision Care Plan; and Dependent Care Account Plan. FedEx is the Plan Sponsor and named administrator for each plan. For example, in the 401(k) Summary Plan Description, FedEx is defined as the Plan Administrator to “act[ ] on [participants'] behalf to see that the Ground/Freight RSP is administered fairly according to standards outlined in the law and the terms of the Ground/Freight RSP and Trust Agreement.” 401(k) SPD, p. 36. In the Ground Benefits Plus Plan Administration (FedEx Health Benefits Summary Plan Description)-a collection of the Medical, Short-Term Disability, Long-Term Disability, and Life Plans-FedEx is listed as the Plan Administrator responsible for supervision under the plans. Health Benefits SPD, p. 27.

The plan documents provide participants with the opportunity to file a claim for benefits with FedEx or its designee. The 401(k) Summary Plan Description tells participants that they may file a written claim if they believe they are entitled to benefits. 401(k) SPD, p. 38. The Group Life Insurance Benefits Plan states that to make a claim “[a] completed claim form, a certified copy of the death certificate and Your enrollment form must be sent to the Employer or [Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company].” Group Life Ins. Plan, p. 13. Hartford approves the required claims papers. Group Life Ins. Plan, p. 13. The Group Benefits Plus Short-Term Disability Plan, the Medical Plan, and the Dependent Care Account Plan each inform participants that if they believe they are entitled to receive a benefit under the plan, they may file a written claim with the claims administrator on appropriate forms furnished by the claims administrator. STD Plan, § 6.1(c); Medical Plan, § 9.1(c); Dependent Care Account Plan, 6.3(c).

Under the Ground Benefits Plus Long Term Disability Plan, notice of a claim should be given to Hartford within thirty days after a disability starts or as soon as possible, and if the claim is denied, the participant “may appeal to [Hartford] for a full and fair review.” LTD Plan, p. 23. The Plan states that if a claim for benefits is “denied or ignored, in whole or in part, [the participant] may file suit in a state or federal court.” LTD Plan, p. 40. The Health Benefits Summary Plan Description states that “[i]f you, a covered dependent, or a beneficiary believe that you (or they) are entitled to receive a particular benefit under Ground Benefits Plus, you (or they) may file a claim, if applicable.” Health Benefits SPD, p. 25.

FedEx has delegated review of initial claims, and under some plans first-level appeals, to outside entities. For the 401(k) Plan, initial claims are handled by a third-party administrator, not FedEx. An appeal under the 401(k) Plan is made to the FedEx Corp.'s Benefits Review Committee. Outside parties administer the initial claim or first-level appeal of claims under either the Short-Term Disability Plan or the Long Term Disability Plan, and FedEx would only be involved in a second-level appeal of a denial under these plans. For benefits under the...