Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s, Pechiney Rolled Products, LLC (Pechiney), Motion to Dismiss Or, In The Alternative, For Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED.

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s first amended and supplemental complaint.  [Docket 16].  The court FINDS that all of the plaintiff’s various claims are either completely or substantively preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.  Accordingly, the court (1) GRANTS the defendants’ motion to recharacterize Count I as a claim for benefits under § 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B); (2) GRANTS the defendants’ motion to dismiss Count II, III, and V with prejudice because such claims are not authorized under ERISA’s civil enforcement provisions; (3) GRANTS the defendants’ motion to dismiss Count IV because it relates to the processing of the plaintiff’s benefits under an ERISA plan; and (4) GRANTS the defendants’ motion to strike the plaintiff’s request for extracontractual compensatory and punitive damages and a jury trial.

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending is defendants William and Charles Polan's motion to strike evidence proffered by R.R. Fredeking and Kim Wolfe. The defendants argue that this court's Decemher 16, 2002 order, which granted the motion by Mr. Fredeking and Mr. Wolfe to intervene and for relief from judgment, was jurisdictionally infirm because of the pendancy of an appeal. Accordingly, they argue, Mr. Fredeking and Mr. Wolfe are not parties to this lawsuit and lack standing to submit evidence. In addition, the defendants argue that the proffered evidence should be excluded under Fed. R. Fvid. 608(b) and for lack of adequate time to object to the evidence. The court will consider these objections in turn.

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Currently pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and Defendant's Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss. In response, Plaintiffs filed Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. In reply thereto, Defendant filed Red Roof Inns, Inc.'s Reply Memorandum in_Support of its Motion to Dismiss. Also currently pending before the Court is the Memorandum of Red Roof Inns, Inc. in Support of its Renewed Motion to Dismiss or, Alternatively, Motion for Summary Judgment. In response, Plaintiffs filed Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Memorandum in Support of its Renewed Motion to Dismiss or, Alternatively, Motion for Summary Judgment. Finally, in reply thereto, Defendant filed the Reply Memorandum of Red Roof Inns, Inc. in Support of its Renewed Motion to Dismiss or, Alternatively, Motion for Summary Judgment. Having reviewed the aforementioned Motions, all memoranda both in support thereof and in opposition thereto, as well as all relevant case and statutory law, the Court is now prepared to issue its decision.