Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Arlene Miller v. Mellon Long Term Disability Pl, 11-3833 (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 11-3833 Visitors: 34
Filed: Sep. 17, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 11-3833 _ ARLENE MILLER, Appellant v. MELLON LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN and "JOHN DOE", Global Head of Compensation and Benefits of the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, in his or her official capacity as Plan Administrator of Mellon Long Term Disability Plan, "JOHN DOE" being fictitious, the real name of said defendant being unknown to plaintiff, said fictitious name being intended to describe the unknown Global Head of Compensation a
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-3833 _____________ ARLENE MILLER, Appellant v. MELLON LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN and "JOHN DOE", Global Head of Compensation and Benefits of the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, in his or her official capacity as Plan Administrator of Mellon Long Term Disability Plan, "JOHN DOE" being fictitious, the real name of said defendant being unknown to plaintiff, said fictitious name being intended to describe the unknown Global Head of Compensation and Benefits of the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation _______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (No. 09-cv-01166) Magistrate Judge: Honorable Maureen P. Kelly Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) September 14, 2012 __________________ JUDGMENT ORDER __________________ Before: SMITH and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL, District Judge.  The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation. On September 15, 2011, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on all of Arlene Miller’s claims related to her attempt to seek long-term disability benefits under her former employer’s disability insurance plan. We have carefully considered the Magistrate Judge’s excellent opinion, which we believe fully and accurately addresses the issues raised by Miller and therefore requires no further elucidation from this Court. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED by the Court that the judgment of the District Court dated September 15, 2011, is hereby affirmed. All of the above in accordance with the opinion of this Court. No costs shall be taxed. BY THE COURT, /s/Michael A. Chagares Circuit Judge DATED: September 17, 2012 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer