[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 13 94 2

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock et No. 3 :0 9- cv -0 10 63 -TJC -J BT JUDY BARLOW, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,

ve rs us SUN LIFE & HEALTH INSURANCE COM PANY, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t, MORR ISON HOMES LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, Defen da nt

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Mi dd le Dis tri ct of F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st 31 , 20 12 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, JOR DAN and ALARCÓN, Cir cu it Ju dg es . *

Honora ble Arthur L

. Alarc ón, United States Circuit J udg e for the Ninth Circuit, sitti ng by * desig nation. Case: 11-13942 Date Filed: 08/31/2012 Page: 1 of 5PER CURI AM:

Su n Life & Heal th In su ran ce Co m pa ny ap pe al s t h e d i s tri ct co ur t’s gr an t of

su m m ary jud gm en t to Ju dy Barl ow on he r cl ai m fo r lo ng -te rm di sa bi li ty. Bec au se we writ e on ly fo r th e pa rti es , we as su m e th ei r fam il ia rit y wit h th e fact s, an d do no t res ta te th em be lo w. W he re a n a d mi ni st rat or ap pl ie s or us es an in co rrec t de fin it io n of an ERISA pl an te rm th e pr op er c o u r s e is ge ne ral ly to rem an d th e m at te r to th e ad m in is tra to r. Se e, e.g
. , Ki ng v. Har tf

or d Li fe & Acci de nt In s. Co

. , 41 4 F.3 d 99 4, 10 05 -0 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) ( en ba nc ) (wh ere th e pl an a d mi n is tra to r ap pl ie s an in co rrec t de fin it io n, th e pr op er rem ed y is to rem an d to th e ad m in is tra to r fo r re-e va lu at io n of th e cl ai m un de r th e co rrec t de fin it io n) ; Jo ne s v. Met r o
. L i f e In s. Co ., 38 5 F.3 d 65 4, 66 5 (6 th Ci r. 20 04 ) (rem an di ng m at te r be cau se ad m in is tra to r ap pl ie d im pe rm i s s ib le de fin it io n) ; Sa ff le v. Si er ra Pac if

ic Pow er Co

. Bar

ga in in g Uni t Lo ng T

e r m D i sa bi li ty In co me Pla n , 85 F.3 d 45 5, 45 9- 60 (9 th Ci r. 19 96 ) (rem an di ng m at te r be cau se ad m in is tra to r

m is co ns tru ed pl an l a n g u a g e). Cf

. Levi ns on v. Reli an ce St an da rd Li fe In s. Co

. , 24 5 F.3 d 1 32 1, 1 33 0 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 1) (ag reei ng th at rem an d to th e pl an ad m in is tra to r is th e ge ne ral ru le , bu t ack no wled gi ng th at rem an d is no t ap pr op ria te in ev ery cas e). A

rev ie w of th e reco rd rev eal s mu l t i p le in st an ces of th e pl an ad m in is tra to r an d th e

2 Case: 11-13942 Date Filed: 08/31/2012 Page: 2 of 5m ed ic al ex pe rts us in g a n i nc or rect de fin it io n o f “ reg ul ar o ccu pa ti on .”

The ERISA pl an at is su e he re de fin ed th e te rm “ reg ul ar oc cu pa ti on ” as “ [t]he

oc cu pa ti on y ou are pe rfo rm in g whe n yo ur Peri od of Dis ab il it y co m m en ces . Thi s refe rs to y ou r oc cu pa ti on as i t i s t y pi cal ly perfo rm ed rat he r th an th e d ut ie s requ ire d by a sp eci fic em

pl oyer or at a sp eci fic lo cat io n.” The pa rti es ag ree th at th is de fin it io n read s “ oc cu pa ti on ” br oa dl y to en co m pa ss m or e th an jus t th e sp eci fic du ti es th at Ms

. Barl ow pe rfo rm ed fo r he r em pl oyer. Se e Bri ef fo r App el la nt at 35 ; Bri ef fo r App el le e
at 25

. The reco rd , ho wev er, co nt ai ns m ul ti pl e refe ren ces to Ms

. Barl ow’s part ic ul ar du ti es fo r he r em

pl oyer an d he r ab il it y or in ab il it y to pe rfo rm th os e pa rti cu la r du ti es , rat he r th an to th e du ti es of Ms

. Barl ow’s o c c u p a ti on as it was typic al ly pe rfo rm ed

. Th e reco rd sh ows th at Su n Life co nc en tra te d on whe th er Ms

. Barl ow co nt in u e d t o

su ffer fro m he r cl ai m ed li m it at io n s , r a t h e r th an whe th er sh e co ul d pe rfo rm he r

“ reg ul ar o ccu pa ti on ” as it is typic al ly perfo rm ed

. The reco rd is al so un cl ear as to wha t “ oc cu pa ti on ” was ap pl ie d to Ms

. Barl ow fo r pu rp os es of de te rm in in g whe th er sh e was ab le to pe rfo rm th e du ti es of th at typic al

oc cu pa ti on . Fo r ex am

pl e, Dr. Koh en ’s rep or t ch arac te riz es Ms

. Barl ow’s oc cu pa ti on

as th at of a “ sa le s m an ag er,” whi le Dr. Alg ha feer ’s rep or t ch arac te riz es Ms

. Barl ow’s

oc cupa tio n as “ re al es ta te br ok er.” Add it io na ll y , th ou gh Ms

. Barl ow an d he r em pl oyer

co nt in uo us l y c h a r act eri zed he r m os t rece nt oc cu pa ti on as th at of “ area sa le s

3 Case: 11-13942 Date Filed: 08/31/2012 Page: 3 of 5m an ag er,” Su n Life , in it s le tt er of May 4, 20 09 , de sc rib ed Ms

. Barl ow’s oc cu pa ti on

as “ sa le s m an ag er.” To m ak e m at te rs ev en m or e co nf us in g, t he reco rd is al so un cl ear as to wha t, i f a n y, jo b de sc rip ti on or ot he r vo cat io na l in fo rm at io n was us ed by Su n Life o r pr ov id ed to Drs. Koh en an d Alg ha feer

. In de ed , th e on ly ev id en ce in th e reco rd ab ou t Ms

. Barl ow’s “ oc cu pa ti on as it is typic a l l y p e r f or m ed ” was a job de sc rip ti on fo r

“ Man ag er, Rea l Est at e Fi rm ” fro m th e Dict io na ry of Occu pa ti on al Tit le s, whi ch was

su bm it te d by Ms

. Barl ow to Su n Life du rin g he r ad m in is tra ti ve ap pe al

. It is un cl ear, ho wev er, wh et he r Su n Li fe ev er ad op te d, m od ifi ed , or re jecte d t hi s d es cri pt io n. Bec au se it is im

po ss ib le to ap pl y th e arb it rary an d cap ric io us st an da rd wit ho ut kn owi ng wha t Su n Life be li ev ed Ms

. Barl ow’s oc cu pa ti on was , an d wit ho ut kn owi ng ho w S un Life de fin ed “ reg ul ar oc cu pa ti on ,” a rem an d is ap pr op ria te . Th is is no t an

“ un us ua l” cas e li ke Levi ns on , whe re al l of th e ev id en ce te nd ed to sh ow th at th e pl ai nt iff was st il l di sa bl ed

. The refo re, rem an d is warra nt ed so th at Su n Life wil l ha ve th e op po rtu ni ty to co ns id er and ap pl y th e co rrec t defi ni ti on of “ reg ul ar occu pa ti on ” in de te rm in in g wh et he r Ms . Barl ow i s “ to ta ll y di sa bl ed .” Acco rd in gl y , we va cat e th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t in fav or of Ms

. Barl ow, an d rem an d to th e di st ric t co ur t wit h in st ru ct io ns to rem an d th e m at te r to Su n Li f

e f o r it to co nd uc t a vo cat io na l an al y si s an d co ns id er in th e fir st in st an ce
4 Case: 11-13942 Date Filed: 08/31/2012 Page: 4 of 5whe th er Ms

. Barl ow is un ab le to pe rfo rm al l of th e m at eri al an d su bs ta nt ia l du ti es of

he r “ reg ul ar oc cu pa ti on ” as it is typic al ly pe rfo rm ed

. Onc e Su n Li f e de fin es Ms

. Barl ow’s “ reg ul ar o c cu pa ti on ,” th e pa rti es sh ou ld ha ve an op po rtu ni ty to pr es en t ad di ti on al ev id en ce ab ou t wh et he r Ms . Barl ow i s “ to ta ll y di sa bl ed .” V A C A T E D A N D R E M A N D E D .

5 Case: 11-13942 Date Filed: 08/31/2012 Page: 5 of 5