SUJATA VYAS, Dr. v. Bhaskar Vyas, an individual;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SUJATA VYAS, Dr.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
BHASKAR VYAS, an individual; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-56632
D.C. No.
8:15-cv-02152-RSWL-DFM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 8, 2019**
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER and OWENS, Circuit Judges, and CHRISTENSEN,***
Chief District Judge.
Plaintiff Sujata Vyas appeals from the district court’s orders granting
summary judgment to Defendants Bhaskar Vyas and Schwab Retirement Plan
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable Dana L. Christensen, Chief United States District
Judge for the District of Montana, sitting by designation.
FILED
MAR 20 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Services, Inc. (“Schwab”). As the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not
recount them here. We affirm.
1. Vyas does not have standing to sue her ex-husband for breach of
fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”).
Vyas is not “a participant, beneficiary or fiduciary” of the relevant plan. See 29
U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2). Vyas is not named in the plan documents, and the plan is not
mentioned in the judgment of dissolution or in a qualified domestic relations order.
See 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(3)(C), (J).
2. Vyas has no claim for breach of fiduciary duty against Schwab because
Schwab did not “perform[] a fiduciary function” when it took “the action[s] subject
to complaint.” Pegram v. Herdrich, 530 U.S. 211, 226 (2000). Vyas alleged only
that Schwab carried out the directions of the plan administrator, which is not a
party to this lawsuit. See Wright v. Or. Metallurgical Corp., 360 F.3d 1090, 1102
(9th Cir. 2004) (“ERISA relieves a trustee from fiduciary obligations regarding the
management and control of a plan’s assets when the trustee is directed by the
plan’s designated fiduciaries.” (quotation marks omitted)). Schwab did not
“exercise[] any discretionary authority or discretionary control respecting
management of [the] plan[s] or exercise[] any authority or control respecting
management or disposition of [plan] assets.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21)(A)(i).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --