United States v. Siemens America, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding “ERISA does not require that harm be shown before a plan partic ipant is entitled to an injunction ordering the plan administrator to comply with ERISA’s reporting and disclosure requirements”
• remanding because the district court’s lack of explanation for the basis for summary judgment was not alleviated by the briefing on appeal
• denying recovery where plaintiffs claimed plan documents failed to disclose that severance pay would not be provided to employees who continued working for purchaser of corporate division
• finding “ERISA does not require that harm be shown before a plan participant is entitled to an injunction ordering the plan administrator to comply with ERISA’s reporting and disclosure requirements”
• failure to distribute document regarding separation pay policy alone is immaterial to the question of entitlement to benefits under the policy
• “However, standing alone, the fact that a separation pay policy document was not distributed to the employees is ‘irrelevant in determining entitlement to benefits.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).