NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

:

KEVIN M. MCCANN, M.D., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-3241 (MLC) 

:

Plaintiff, : MEMORANDUM OPINION

:

v. :

:

UNUM PROVIDENT, et al., : 

:

Defendants. :

 :

COOPER, District Judge

OUTLINE OF OPINION

INTRODUCTION

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. The Plan and the Policy

1. Total Disability and Occupation

2. Benefit Payment for Total Disability

3. Residual Disability

4. Benefit Payment for Residual Disability

B. Pre-Application Events

1. Medical Treatment

2. Initial Consultation with Dr. Coselli

3. Application for Disability Benefits

C. Initial Claim Processing

1. Telephone Interview

2. Initial Requests for Medical Records

3. Claim Processing Letter

4. Request and Review of Financial and Vocational Records

5. Field Representative In-Person Interview

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 1 of 76 PageID: 6889
2

6. Receipt of Holzer Medical Records, Holzer CPT Codes,

Dr. Linder APS, Dr. Coselli APS

7. Claim Processing Letter

D. Initial Approval with Reservation of Rights

1. Dr. Davids Review

2. Laprade Review

3. Administrative Correspondence: September of 2008–

October of 2008

4. Vocational Consultant Review

E. Removal of Reservation of Rights and Supplemental Administrative

Review

1. Administrative Correspondence: December of 2008

2. Medical Records Request

3. Administrative Correspondence: February of 2009–

May of 2009

4. Clinical Review

5. Administrative Correspondence: June of 2009

6. 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study

7. Administrative Correspondence: July of 2009

8. Medical Records Request: Dr. Fahmy

9. Statistical Vocational Review

10. Follow Up Consultation with Dr. Coselli and Accompanying

Correspondence

11. Follow Up In-Person Interview

F. New Physician: Dr. Lombardi

1. Initial Appointment

2. Medical Records Request and Review

G. Dr. Coselli’s Response to Records Request

H. Administrative Correspondence: November of 2009

I. Medical Records Request: Dr. Linder

J. Second Medical Review

1. Initial Contacts with Dr. Lombardi

2. O’Brien Medical Review

3. Dr. Parisi Review

4. Dr. Linder Medical Records Review

5. Dr. Parisi Contact with Dr. Lombardi

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 2 of 76 PageID: 6890
3

K. Occupational Analysis

L. Final Medical Review

M. Termination

1. Voicemail Notification

2. Written Notice

3. Subsequent Medical Opinions

N. The Appeal

1. Records Request

2. Vocational Review: Meeting with Dr. Long

3. Medical Review

4. Vocational Rehabilitation Consultant Review

5. Provident Life’s Final Determination on Appeal

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A. Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

B. De Novo Standard of Review

DISCUSSION

III. LEGAL STANDARD APPLIED HERE

A. Medical Review in Support of Final Determination

B. Occupational Classification

C. Reversal of Opinion: Reservation of Rights

D. Residual Disability Benefits

CONCLUSION

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 3 of 76 PageID: 6891
4

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, Dr. Kevin M. McCann (“McCann”), commenced this action pursuant to 

the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) against, among 

others, Defendant Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Provident Life” or 

“the Company”).1 (Dkt. 1.)2 McCann and Provident Life filed opposing motions for 

summary judgment concerning Provident Life’s decision to terminate McCann’s benefit 

payments under a Residents’ Supplemental Disability Insurance Plan (“the Plan”) issued 

by Provident Life. (Dkt. 93; dkt. 94.) The Court reviews the termination de novo to 

determine whether that decision was correct.3 

The Court has carefully reviewed the papers and the lengthy administrative record, 

and held oral argument on July 21, 2015. (Dkt. 105.) The Court also accepted 

supplemental briefing after oral argument. (See dkt. 109; dkt. 110; dkt. 111.) The Court, 

for the reasons discussed below, finds that Provident Life correctly interpreted and 

applied the terms of the Plan to render its decision that the facts and evidence in the 

 

1 McCann incorrectly named Provident Life as “Unum Provident.” (See, e.g., dkt. 1; see also

dkt. 93-2 at 5.) McCann also named Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 

(“Hartford”) as a defendant in this action. (Dkt. 1.) This Court previously decided opposing 

motions for summary judgment filed by McCann and Hartford by way of Memorandum Opinion 

and accompanying Order. (Dkt. 58; dkt. 59.) The Order granted the motion for summary 

judgment filed by Hartford, and denied the opposing motion for summary judgment filed by 

McCann. (Dkt. 59.) 

2 The Court will cite to the documents filed on the Electronic Case Filing System (“ECF”) by 

referring to docket entry numbers by the designation of “dkt.” Pincites reference ECF 

pagination. When quoting the administrative record we correct obvious clerical errors without so 

noting, and add bracketed explanatory material, but do not change the substance of the text.

3 The parties agree that the de novo standard applies here, because the Plan did not grant 

Provident Life discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits. (Dkt. 93-2 at 7; dkt. 

94-7 at 33.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 4 of 76 PageID: 6892
5

record did not support a finding that McCann was eligible for Total Disability benefits. 

Accordingly, the Court will grant the motion for summary judgment filed by Provident 

Life, and deny the cross motion for summary judgment filed by McCann. 

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The relevant facts in this action primarily concern: (1) the Plan; (2) McCann’s 

medical diagnoses and treatment; and (3) circumstances related to McCann’s 

employment. The Court will summarize the factual background regarding each of those 

issues below. 

A. The Plan and the Policy

McCann, a radiologist certified in the sub-specialty of interventional radiology, 

began working for Holzer Clinic (“Holzer”) in Gallipolis, Ohio in February of 2005. 

(Dkt. 94-7 at 14; see also dkt. 94-6 at 2; dkt. 58.)4 McCann had previously enrolled in the

Plan on June 26, 1991, when employed at Henry Ford Hospital. (Dkt. 93-3 at 2.) The 

Plan took effect on July 1, 1991 under the policy number 06-337-04053663 (“the 

Policy”). (Id.)

5

 ERISA governed the Policy, and the provisions of the Policy are relevant

 

4

Interventional radiology is a medical specialty that involves “the hands-on treatment of 

patients” and the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions “utilizing catheters and other 

medical instruments guided through the body by various imaging modalities ....” (Dkt. 94-6 at 

2.) In addition to completing a surgical internship and four years of study in diagnostic 

radiology, McCann completed a one-year interventional radiology fellowship program. (Id.) 

McCann is also a board-certified diagnostic radiologist. (Id.) Diagnostic radiology, as compared 

to interventional radiology, generally concerns the review and interpretation of diagnostic 

studies. (See dkt. 94-7 at 13.) 

5 The parties cited portions of the administrative record in their summary judgment papers. 

Subsequently, the Court requested and received a compact disc containing a complete copy of 

the entire 2,527-page administrative record. We have filed that disc under seal as docket entry 

number 64 to docket entry number 64-17. The Court will cite to that administrative record, when 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 5 of 76 PageID: 6893
6

to the Court’s analysis here. (Id.) The Court examines the relevant provisions of the 

Policy below. 

1. Total Disability and Occupation

A participant, in order to qualify for Total Disability under the Policy, must 

demonstrate: (1) proof of loss due to injury and sickness; (2) the inability to perform 

substantial and material job duties; and (3) that a physician currently treats the condition 

causing the disability. (BATES-155; see also dkt. 93-3 at 2.) The Policy jointly defines 

the terms “Total Disability” and “totally disabled.” (BATES-155.)6 Pursuant to the 

Policy, a participant meets the criteria for “Total Disability” or is deemed “totally 

disabled” where the participant is:

(1) ... not able to perform the substantial and material duties of [his or 

her] occupation; and

(2) ... receiving care by a Physician which is appropriate for the 

condition causing the disability ... 

(Id.)

7

 

The Policy defines “occupation” as “the occupation (or occupations, if more than 

one) in which [the participant is] regularly engaged at the time” the disability occurs. 

 

appropriate, by reference to the Bates Stamp citation affixed to each page. The Court, in the 

interest of clarity and brevity, will replace the preceding “PLA-CL-IDI” from each citation with 

“BATES.” The Court will likewise omit each preceding “0” following the “BATES” reference. 

6 The Court will adopt the Policy’s capital and lower case lettering and punctuation in this 

Memorandum Opinion. 

7 The Policy waives the second requirement, so long as the participant demonstrates that “continued 

care” would not be beneficial. (BATES-155.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 6 of 76 PageID: 6894
7

(Id.) The Policy recognizes specialty occupations so long as that specialty “is limited to a 

recognized specialty within the scope of [the participant’s] degree or license ...” (Id.)

8

 

2. Benefit Payment for Total Disability

The Policy originally provided a monthly benefit payment for Total Disability of 

$7,500.00; however, McCann later increased the benefit to $15,000.00 per month. 

(BATES-153; see also BATES-111.) Pursuant to the Policy, Provident Life renders 

monthly benefits for Total Disability to eligible participants as follows:

(1) Benefits start on the day of Total Disability following the 

Elimination Period.

(2) Benefits will continue while [the participant is] totally disabled 

during the period of disability but not beyond the Maximum Benefit 

Period.

(BATES-157.)9

3. Residual Disability

The Policy also provides Residual Disability benefits for eligible participants who 

worked reduced hours in their occupation. (BATES-160–61.) Residual Disability 

benefits issue under the Policy to eligible participants who demonstrate: 

(1) ... [the inability] to do one or more ... substantial and material daily 

business duties or ... [the inability] ... to do ... usual daily business 

duties for as much time as it would normally take ... to do them;

(2) ... a Loss of Monthly Income ... of at least 20%; and

 

8 That definition governs the disbursement of Total Disability benefits, and Residual Disability 

benefits, discussed infra Sec. I.A.2–4.

9 The Elimination Period is 90 days. (BATES-111.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 7 of 76 PageID: 6895
8

(3) ... [the participant is under the care of] a Physician which is 

appropriate for the condition causing disability ....

(BATES-160.)10

4. Benefit Payment for Residual Disability 

The following formula governs the disbursement of Residual Disability benefits 

under the Policy:

Loss of Monthly Income

x Monthly Benefit for Total 

Disability

Prior Monthly Income

(BATES-161.)11

Monthly Income is defined as the participant’s:

monthly income from salary, wages, bonuses, commissions, fees or other 

payments for services .... Normal and usual business expenses are to be deducted; 

income taxes are not. Monthly Income must be earned. It does not include 

dividends, interest, rent, royalties, annuities, sick pay or benefits received for 

disability under a formal wage or salary continuation plan or other forms of 

unearned income.

(BATES-160.)

Prior Monthly Income is defined as the greatest of the following calculations:

(1) ... average Monthly Income for the 12 months just prior to the start 

of the period of disability ...

(2) ... average Monthly Income for the year with the highest earnings of 

the last two years prior to the start of such period of disability; or

 

10 The third requirement is waived so long as “continued care would be of no benefit” to the Plan 

participant. (BATES-160.) 

11 Mathematically, this formula divides the Loss of Monthly Income by the Prior Monthly 

Income. That number is then multiplied by the Monthly Benefit for Total Disability. 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 8 of 76 PageID: 6896
9

(3) ... highest average Monthly Income for any two successive years of 

the last five years prior to the start of such period of disability.

(Id.)

The Policy defines Loss of Monthly Income as:

the difference between Prior Monthly Income and Current Monthly 

Income. Loss of Monthly Income must be caused by the Residual 

Disability for which [the] claim is made. The amount of the loss must be at 

least 20% of Prior Monthly Income to be deemed Loss of Monthly Income. 

If [the] loss is more than 75% of [the] Prior Monthly Income, ... [it is 

deemed] to be 100%.

(Id.)

B. Pre-Application Events 

McCann consulted medical providers for the evaluation and treatment of 

obstructive sleep apnea (“OSA”), a mildly dilated ascending aortic root aneurysm (“aortic 

aneurysm”), hypertension, and obesity from 2006 through 2010. (Dkt. 94-6 at 3–6; dkt. 

93-3 at 6.) The Court summarizes those evaluations, insofar as they relate to these

motions, below.

1. Medical Treatment

Dr. Howard E. Linder, a sleep specialist at Holzer, diagnosed McCann with OSA 

in December of 2006. (BATES-2094; see also BATES-706.) OSA “is a condition in 

which the flow of air pauses or significantly decreases during breathing while the 

individual is asleep due to a narrowing or blockage of the airway.” (Dkt. 94-6 at 3.) As a 

result of the airway narrowing or blockage, OSA can cause interruptions in breathing 

patterns. (Id.) According to Dr. Linder, OSA caused McCann to experience daytime 

sleepiness. (BATES-582.) Dr. Linder documented, for example, that McCann 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 9 of 76 PageID: 6897
10

experienced “excessive daytime sleepiness,” and indicated McCann was “probably 

unable to stay alert for long periods” at work. (BATES-582–83.) 

McCann underwent a sleep study on December 18, 2006 (“12-18-06 Sleep Study”) 

to evaluate the severity of his OSA. (BATES-582–85.) Based upon the results of the 12-

18-06 Sleep Study, Dr. Linder developed a treatment plan for McCann’s OSA. (BATES582–84.) The treatment plan included, inter alia, the utilization of a continuous positive 

airway pressure machine (“CPAP Machine”) at 12 centimeters of water (“cm h20”) to 

assist McCann with breathing during sleep. (Id.) 

McCann underwent a cardiac evaluation in 2007, after he reported experiencing a 

“strange chest feeling.” (Dkt. 94-6 at 6; see also BATES-196.) A CT scan of McCann’s 

chest on April 10, 2007 (“4-10-07 CT Scan”) revealed an aortic aneurysm measuring 4.5 

cm. (BATES-190.) “The aorta is the largest artery in the body,” and the vessel that 

supplies blood pumped by the heart to the rest of the body. (Dkt. 94-7 at 12.) An 

aneurysm is “an abnormal enlargement of a weakened area in an arterial wall.” (Id.) 

McCann also underwent an echocardiogram on April 16, 2007 (“4-16-07 

Echocardiogram”). (BATES-73.) The results of the 4-16-07 Echocardiogram reported 

that the aortic aneurysm measured 3.71 cm, and further stated in relevant part as follows:

.... The cardiac chambers were all normal size, motion and dimension with 

[the] exception of the aortic root, mildly dilated at 3.71 [cm]. There was 

mild left ventricle hypertrophy ....

(Id.)

McCann underwent an additional CT scan at Holzer on January 9, 2008 (“1-9-08 

CT Scan”). The results of the 1-9-08 CT Scan stated the following with respect to 

McCann’s aortic aneurysm:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 10 of 76 PageID: 6898
11

.... The chest wall anatomy appeared within normal limits. The 

mediastinum and pericardium appeared normal .... The aortic valve was 

estimated at 3.5 cm. The aortic knob was 3.5 cm. The proximal ascending 

arch measured at its peak size at 3.8 cm to 4 cm. Proximal arch was 

approximately 2.8 cm and the proximal descending aorta was 3 cm.

(BATES-68.)

2. Initial Consultation with Dr. Coselli 

McCann, upon receiving the results of the 1-9-08 CT Scan, scheduled an 

appointment with Dr. Joseph S. Coselli, the Chair of Cardiothoracic Surgery at the Texas 

Heart Institute at Baylor Medical Center, on January 30, 2008 (“1-30-08 Dr. Coselli 

Appointment”). (BATES-2073–76.) Dr. Coselli reviewed, inter alia, the results of the 

4-16-07 Echocardiogram and 1-9-08 CT Scan. (BATES-2075–76.) Dr. Coselli 

documented that he had a “very lengthy visit” with McCann, wherein he sketched “the 

approximate size and location of [McCann’s] aneurysm.” (BATES-2076.) Based upon 

McCann’s studies and a physical examination, Dr. Coselli recommended that McCann, 

inter alia: (1) maintain “[t]ight BP management of 110 –120/70”; (2) “[e]xercise to stay 

fit and in order to drop some weight”; and (3) reduce fat intake. (Id.) McCann also 

estimated that there was a 30% chance that McCann would require surgical treatment for 

the aortic aneurysm within the next 10 years. (Id.) 

3. Application for Disability Benefits

McCann stopped working at Holzer on March 7, 2008, and submitted an 

application for disability benefits under the Policy on March 14, 2008. (BATES-88–89; 

BATES-97.) He listed Dr. Coselli as his sole medical provider on the application form. 

(BATES-89.) Dr. Coselli drafted a letter dated April 3, 2008 (“4-3-08 Dr. Coselli 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 11 of 76 PageID: 6899
12

Letter”) in support of McCann’s disability classification. (BATES-430.) The 4-3-08 Dr. 

Coselli Letter, which was addressed to Dr. Wayne Muro at Holzer, read, in relevant part, 

as follows:

.... [McCann’s] testing showed there was a dilation of [the aorta of] 4cm 

that currently did not require any surgical intervention. Additionally, ... 

McCann has hypertension and sleep apnea placing him into a high risk 

population for risk of further dilation to his aorta. Our recommendations to 

the patient are to maintain tight blood pressure control, weight loss and 

undertaking an exercise regime in order to improve his overall functional 

capacity. He has been instructed to have follow-up CTA’s every 6 months 

to monitor his aorta and avoid stressful situations that could cause increases 

in his blood pressure. In light of these restrictions, I feel it would be best if 

he was classified as fully disabled permanently, effective March 10, 2009.

(BATES-430.) 

Provident Life acknowledged receipt of McCann’s application in a letter dated 

March 17, 2008, and requested that McCann submit an “Attending Physician Statement” 

(“APS”) in support of his application. (BATES-55.) Provident Life again requested the 

APS in a letter dated March 31, 2008. (BATES-59.) That letter informed McCann that 

the APS was required in order for Provident Life to issue a decision on his claim. (Id.) 

Dr. Coselli submitted an APS to Provident Life on April 2, 2008 (“4-2-08 Dr. 

Coselli APS”). (BATES-63–65.) The APS summarized the 1-30-08 Dr. Coselli 

Appointment, and identified McCann’s “Primary Diagnosis” as a “mildly dilated aortic 

root aneurysm” measuring 3.8–4.0 cm. (BATES-63.) With respect to McCann’s 

“Subjective Symptoms,” however, Dr. Coselli described that McCann was 

“asymptomatic on the date of exam.” (Id.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 12 of 76 PageID: 6900
13

The 4-2-08 Dr. Coselli APS also stated that McCann’s secondary diagnoses were 

hypertension and obesity. (BATES-63–64.) Dr. Coselli described that his treatment plan 

for McCann recommended “tight blood pressure control, yearly CT scans to monitor the 

aorta dia[meter], weight loss [and] exercise.” (BATES-63.) With respect to McCann’s 

psychological health, Dr. Coselli also documented that he was “not aware of any 

psychological problems” but noted that McCann felt “his job stresses contribute[d] to 

hypertension.” (BATES-64) As to job-related restrictions, Dr. Coselli advised that 

McCann should avoid “lifting that ilicits [sic] Valsalva maneuver, otherwise no 

restrictions.” (Id.)

12

 Finally, with respect to job-related limitations, Dr. Coselli advised 

McCann to “avoid heavy lifting, avoid stress to help keep BP under control to prevent 

further dilation of [the] aorta.” (Id.) The 4-2-08 Dr. Coselli APS asked the question 

“Have you advised patient to return to work?” and Dr. Coselli answered affirmatively by 

marking the box “Yes” with an “X.” (Id.) 

C. Initial Claim Processing

Provident Life acknowledged receipt of McCann’s claim for disability benefits by 

letter dated April 4, 2008. (BATES-78–79.) That letter informed McCann that the 

Company would request and review medical and financial information in order to process 

his claim. (Id.) As described below, Provident Life obtained necessary information from 

McCann through interviews and requests for medical records and financial documents. 

 

12 “The Valsalva maneuver is performed by attempting to forcibly exhale while keeping the 

mouth and nose closed. It is used as a diagnostic tool to evaluate the condition of the heart and is 

sometimes done as a treatment to correct abnormal heart rhythms or relieve chest pain.” (Dkt. 

93-2 at 16.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 13 of 76 PageID: 6901
14

1. Telephone Interview

A Provident Life representative conducted a telephone interview with McCann on 

April 24, 2008. (BATES-97–98.) McCann stated that he was diagnosed with an 

aneurysm following the 4-10-07 CT Scan. (BATES-97.) McCann also explained his 

history of sleep apnea, and treatment via CPAP Machine, and persistent hypertension. 

(Id.) 

McCann explained that he consulted Dr. Coselli because he was at “the top of his 

field” of cardiothoracic surgery. (Id.) According to McCann, Dr. Coselli estimated that 

McCann had a 10–15 year life expectancy with his condition. (Id.) McCann also stated 

that surgery was not warranted, because the aortic aneurysm was not at a “critical size” 

requiring treatment. (Id.) 

The Provident Life representative asked McCann about his occupation at Holzer. 

(BATES-98.) McCann described that he worked for Holzer for about three years, and 

recently experienced difficulty maintaining his workload due to fatigue related to OSA. 

(Id.) He stated that he reduced his workload on two occasions during the past year, and 

eventually ceased working on March 7, 2008. (BATES-97–98.) The Provident Life 

representative explained that Provident Life planned to review supporting financial and 

occupational information to determine McCann’s eligibility for Total Disability. (Id.) 

The representative also informed McCann that he may qualify for Residual Disability 

benefits, because he reduced his workload before leaving Holzer. (Id.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 14 of 76 PageID: 6902
15

2. Initial Requests for Medical Records

Provident Life sent letters to Dr. Coselli and Holzer dated April 29, 2008. 

(BATES-101; BATES-121.)13 Those letters requested “copies of medical records,” 

including the following items:

 Office notes, including history and physical exams

 Consultations by any physician

 Reports of diagnostic tests and laboratory results

 Treatment notes, procedure notes, and operative reports

 Any hospital records in the file, including admission and discharge 

summaries [and]

 Hospital admission and discharge summaries[.]

(Id.) 

Provident Life received medical records from Dr. Coselli related to the 1-30-08 

Dr. Coselli Appointment, discussed supra Sec. I.B.2, via facsimile dated May 27, 2008. 

(BATES-196–206.) 

3. Claim Processing Letter

Provident Life sent a letter to McCann dated May 6, 2008 (“5-6-08 Claim 

Processing Letter”), which memorialized the telephone interview on April 24, 2008. 

(BATES-111–14.) The 5-6-08 Claim Processing Letter also identified the relevant 

provisions under the Policy that governed McCann’s Claim. (Id.) The 5-6-08 Claim 

Processing Letter explained that McCann would satisfy the Elimination Period on June 8, 

 

13 Provident Life did not receive a response from Dr. Coselli or Holzer by May 7, 2008. 

(BATES-143; BATES-126.) Provident Life sent an additional request to Dr. Coselli via letter 

dated May 13, 2008. (BATES-132.) Provident Life sent another request to Holzer via letters 

dated May 7, 2008 and May 14, 2008. (BATES-126; BATES-143.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 15 of 76 PageID: 6903
16

2008, and therefore the first benefit payment would be due for consideration on July 8, 

2008. (BATES-111.) 

The 5-6-08 Claim Processing Letter informed McCann that the Company would 

review the following documents with respect to his claim: (1) any occupational 

restrictions and limitations; (2) the duties that McCann performed in the occupation in 

which he was “engaged at the time disability began”; and (3) how McCann’s restrictions 

and limitations affected the performance of his job duties. (BATES-112.) The 5-6-08 

Claim Processing Letter also informed McCann that Provident Life requested medical 

documents from his treating physicians. (BATES-112–13.) With respect to McCann’s 

claim for Residual Disability benefits, the 5-6-08 Claim Processing Letter requested that 

McCann submit the following to Provident Life: 

(1) A summary of all CPT/HCPCS codes for the entire duration of your 

employment at Holzer Clinic ....

(2) Complete copies of ... business and personal tax returns, including 

all W-2’s, 1099’s, schedules and attachments for 5 years prior to the 

date ... [of disability] ....

(3) Copies of any paycheck stubs or statements of monthly income that 

you may have from 6 months prior to disability, as well as any 

months that you are claiming Residual Disability. 

(BATES-113.)

The 5-6-08 Claim Processing Letter explained that the above documents were 

required in order for Provident Life to calculate McCann’s Prior Earnings and Monthly 

Earnings pursuant to the Residual Disability benefits formula. (Id.) See also supra Sec. 

I.A.4.

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 16 of 76 PageID: 6904
4. Request and Review of Financial and Vocational Records 

A Provident Life letter dated May 29, 2008 (“5-29-08 Provident Life Letter”) 

directed McCann to complete an Authorization Form permitting Holzer to release his 

medical records to Provident Life. (BATES-228.) The 5-29-08 Provident Life Letter 

also directed McCann to submit the following documents related to Residual Disability 

benefits:

1. Complete copies of ... business and personal tax returns, 

including all W-2’s, 1099’s, schedules and attachments for 5 

years prior to the date ... [of claimed] disability benefits.

2. Copies of any paycheck stubs on statements of monthly 

income ... from 6 months prior to disability, as well as any 

months ... [of claimed] Residual Disability. 

(Id.) 

The 5-29-08 Provident Life Letter informed McCann that the Company requested 

documentation related to his occupation as an interventional radiologist from Holzer, 

including Current Procedural Terminology (“CPT”) codes related to his practice. (Id.)

14

 

According to the 5-29-08 Provident Life Letter, the Company forwarded the claim file to 

a local field representative. (Id.) The 5-29-08 Provident Life Letter informed McCann 

that a field representative would contact him in the near future to schedule an in-person 

meeting to review his claim. (BATES-229.) 

McCann submitted copies of his monthly earnings statements from August 30, 

2007 through March 31, 2008 to Provident Life on May 30, 2008. (BATES-245–52.)

 

14 Medical providers utilize CPT codes with respect to billing of medical services and 

procedures. (Dkt. 94-7 at 23 n.7; dkt. 93-3 at 17.)

17

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 17 of 76 PageID: 6905
18

On June 23, 2008, McCann sent Provident Life additional financial records including 

monthly income statements, W-2s, and income tax returns. (BATES-287–BATES-426.) 

Provident Life received a response from Holzer regarding McCann’s pre-disability 

occupational duties on June 3, 2008. (BATES-267–71.) Dr. Phillip B. Long, ViceChairman of Radiology at Holzer, completed and submitted a job description form 

detailing McCann’s duties and responsibilities (“6-8-08 Job Description Form”). (Id.) 

Dr. Long stated that McCann was hired on February 14, 2005, and last worked on March 

7, 2008. (BATES-269.) Dr. Long stated that McCann works an average of 60 hours per 

week divided among interventional radiology, diagnostic radiology, fluoroscopy, night 

call, and paperwork. (BATES-268.) Dr. Long provided the following descriptions of 

each of those positions:

Position/Title:

Please list occupational duties in order of important with a detailed

description of each:

Duty: Interventional Radiology Hours spent each week: 20

Description: Perform ... drainages, angiograms, angioplasties, stent

placement + other invasive procedures. These are done in a standing

position wearing a lead apron.

Duty: Diagnostic Radiology Hours spent each week: 2.8

Description: Interpret x-rays, CAT scans, MRIS, ultrasound, etc. In

sitting position in front of view box or computer monitor.

Duty: Fluoroscopy Hours spent each week: 1

Description: Perform barium studies under fluoroscopy in standing

position wearing lead apron.

Duty: Night + Weekend Call Hours spent each week: 10

Description: Perform radiology duties as described above during day;

read CAT scans + ultrasound from computer monitor at night.

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 18 of 76 PageID: 6906
19

Duty: Sign reports, Misc. Paperwork Hours spent each week: 1–2

Description: Mostly done on computer.

(BATES-268 (form text not in bold font).)

The 6-8-08 Job Description Form stated that McCann had not “indicated an 

interest in returning to work.” However, Dr. Long also indicated that Holzer was holding 

McCann’s position. (BATES-270.) According to the 6-8-08 Job Description Form, 

Holzer would also employ McCann on a part-time basis or in a modified capacity. (Id.) 

5. Field Representative In-Person Interview 

A field representative for Provident Life, Ralph E. Olson, interviewed McCann at 

his residence in Manahawkin, New Jersey, on June 18, 2008. (BATES-279–82.) The 

interview lasted approximately one hour. (BATES-280.) During the interview, McCann 

described his educational and employment background. (Id.) McCann explained, for 

example, that his job duties at Holzer involved the interpretation of radiological studies 

via images displayed on a computer screen. (Id.) McCann also stated that he performed 

invasive radiological procedures, which sometimes required him to wear a lead apron. 

(Id.) 

Dr. McCann characterized the work environment at Holzer as “extremely 

stressful.” (Id.) According to Dr. McCann, he was required to work 60 hours per week, 

including night and weekend call hours. (Id.) McCann further described that symptoms 

related to stress, fatigue, and elevated blood pressure prohibited him from continuing to 

work as a radiologist. (BATES-281.) He stated that his blood pressure spiked 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 19 of 76 PageID: 6907
20

“dangerously higher” during work, which increased the “risk of further dilation or 

swelling of his aorta.” (Id.) 

McCann also described his daily routine. (BATES-282.) He explained that he 

spent the majority of his time “resting around the house,” where he also exercised, 

cooked, and cleaned. (Id.) He reported no plan for future employment. (Id.) McCann 

also reviewed the 4-3-08 Dr. Coselli Letter with Olson. (BATES-279.) 

6. Receipt of Holzer Medical Records, Holzer CPT Codes, 

Dr. Linder APS, Dr. Coselli APS

Provident Life received the CPT codes related to McCann’s employment at Holzer 

in late June of 2008. (BATES-519–79.) Provident Life received the requested medical 

records from Holzer on July 13, 2008. (BATES-441–516.)15 

Dr. Linder submitted an APS to Provident Life via facsimile dated July 15, 2008 

(“7-15-08 Dr. Linder APS”). (BATES-481.) The 7-15-08 Dr. Linder APS identified, 

inter alia, McCann’s diagnoses as: (1) “obstructive sleep apnea causing daytime 

sleepiness”; and (2) “excessive daytime sleepiness.” (BATES-582.) See also supra Sec. 

I.B.1 (describing Dr. Linder’s evaluation and treatment of McCann). With respect to 

treatment for OSA, the 7-15-08 Dr. Linder APS recommended that McCann continue to 

utilize the CPAP Machine at a setting of 12 cm h20. (BATES-582.) Dr. Linder also 

documented that he had not diagnosed McCann’s aortic aneurysm, but he opined that 

 

15 Those records included documents related to McCann’s admission to Holzer on July 16, 2005 

for symptoms related to shortness of breath. (BATES-462–67.) The discharge teaching 

instructions for that admission addressed McCann’s hypertension, and instructed McCann to, 

inter alia: (1) lose weight; (2) reduce salt intake; and (3) exercise. (BATES-462.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 20 of 76 PageID: 6908
21

McCann was “probably unable to stay alert for long periods.” (BATES-582–83.) The 7-

15-08 Dr. Linder APS did not indicate whether McCann’s condition would improve, or 

state whether Dr. Linder recommended that McCann return to work. (Id.)

Dr. Coselli sent an APS to Provident Life on July 30, 2008 (“7-30-08 Dr. Coselli 

APS”). (BATES-600-02.) The 7-30-08 Dr. Coselli APS contained the same medical 

information as the 4-2-08 Dr. Coselli APS, discussed supra Sec. I.B.3.16 

7. Claim Processing Letter

Provident Life informed McCann that his claim remained under review via letter 

dated August 20, 2008. (BATES-663–64.) That letter informed McCann that the 

Company received CPT codes from Holzer that were under review by a vocational 

rehabilitation specialist to “independently verify the duties of [McCann’s] occupation as 

an interventional radiologist.” (BATES-664.) The letter also included a blank 

Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form, and instructed McCann to complete his 

section of the form and submit an APS on a monthly basis. (Id.) McCann faxed his 

portion of the Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form to Provident Life on August 31, 

2008. (BATES-687–89.) That Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form identified Dr. 

Coselli as McCann’s current treatment provider. (BATES-689.)

 

16 That form identified, for example, McCann’s primary diagnosis as a “mildly dilated aortic root 

[measuring] 3.8–4cm.” (BATES-601.) The 7-30-08 Dr. Coselli APS described that McCann 

was “asymptomatic” on the date of exam. However, Dr. Coselli recommended that McCann 

“avoid heavy lifting, [and] avoid stress to help keep blood pressure under control to prevent 

further dilation of [his] aorta.” (BATES-602.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 21 of 76 PageID: 6909
22

D. Initial Approval with Reservation of Rights

McCann contacted a Provident Life representative via telephone and requested an 

update regarding the status of the CPT review on September 2, 2008. (BATES-691–92.) 

The Provident Life representative stated that the CPT review was not completed; 

however, she anticipated that the Company would begin paying Total Disability 

payments with a Reservation of Rights in the meantime. (BATES-691.) 

Provident Life informed McCann via letter dated September 4, 2008 (“9-4-08 

Provident Life Letter”) that the Company approved Total Disability payments under the 

Policy with a Reservation of Rights while the Company continued to evaluate McCann’s 

claim. (BATES-697.) The 9-4-08 Provident Life Letter read, in relevant part, as 

follows:

At this time we have initiated payments on your claim. We have issued 

you three (3) checks ... each in the amount of $15,000.00. These checks 

represent payment for the period of June 8, 2008, the commencement date 

of your benefits, to September 8, 2008. These checks are payable under the 

Total Disability provision of your policy and have been sent to you under 

separate cover. 

....

[W]e have provided benefits at this time with a Reservation of Rights while 

we complete our evaluation of your claim as outlined below. This payment 

and any possible future payments, until we advise you otherwise, are being 

made under Reservation of Rights. This means that the payment cannot be 

construed as an admission of past, present or future liability and we reserve 

our right to enforce any and all provisions of the policy. Repayment of 

benefits paid under Reservation of Rights will only be pursued in the event 

of failure to cooperate, misrepresentation and fraud. 

....

Upon completion of [our] reviews we will give further consideration to 

adjustment of your current date of disability. 

(BATES-696–97.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 22 of 76 PageID: 6910
23

1. Dr. Davids Review 

Provident Life submitted McCann’s complete medical file to Dr. Joseph Z. 

Davids, a board-certified physician in internal medicine and cardiovascular diseases, for 

medical review on September 11, 2008. (BATES-703–10; BATES-2024.) Dr. Davids 

submitted his report to Provident Life on September 16, 2008. (BATES-710.) Dr. 

Davids summarized McCann’s clinical history, in relevant part, as follows:

.... McCann has had hypertension for several years. In addition, he has 

dyslipidemia that is being treated appropriately. He also has obstructive 

sleep apnea.

(BATES-707.) 

Dr. Davids concluded that restrictions and limitations related to McCann’s aortic 

aneurysm – as described in the 4-2-08 Dr. Coselli APS and 7-30-08 Dr. Coselli APS –

were supported by the records provided by Dr. Coselli and Holzer. (BATES-706–09.) 

With respect to McCann’s cardiac health, Dr. Davids found that “[s]everal diagnostic 

studies ha[d] demonstrated evidence of dilation of ... McCann’s ascending aorta.” 

(BATES-709.) He further explained:

The dilation of the ascending aorta is directly related to the fact that ... 

McCann’s hypertension has not been adequately controlled. Strict BP 

control is an essential part of the management of this problem in hopes of 

obviating the need for surgical intervention. When the dilation of aneurysm 

reaches 5 to 6 cm, surgical replacement of the ascending aorta is 

recommended. 

(Id.)

Dr. Davids also stated the following regarding McCann’s diagnosis of 

hypertension:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 23 of 76 PageID: 6911
24

The aim of antihypertensive treatment is to keep the BP at 110/70 or lower. 

In addition, the heart rate should be maintained at less than 60–70. The 

antihypertensive medications that are required to maintain this level of tight 

BP control often cause significant side effects, in particular fatigue and 

mental slowness. Based upon this data, I agree with Dr. Coselli’s 

restrictions as noted on the [7-30-08 Dr. Coselli APS.]

(Id.) 

Dr. Davids, with respect to McCann’s prognosis for functional 

improvement, stated the following:

In general, the prognosis for functional improvement is poor because it is 

difficult to maintain this level of tight BP control while working in a 

stressful occupation, such as interventional radiology. Furthermore, an 

interventional radiologist will often perform Valsalva maneuvers during a 

procedure, which will lead to a rise in BP. In addition, side effects from 

antihypertensive medications, in particular fatigue and mental slowness, 

can potentially lead to functional limitations. 

(Id.) 

Dr. Davids opined that evidence of good blood pressure control might alleviate 

McCann’s restrictions and limitations, as described below:

We would need documentation that ... McCann’s hypertension is under 

excellent control. Following that, we would need to have results of a 24-

hour BP monitor while ... McCann is performing interventional procedures 

in order to document that his hypertension is under excellent control when 

he is performing procedures. Under these circumstances, it is possible that 

his restrictions and limitations could change with respect to his 

hypertension and aortic aneurysm.

(Id.) 

Dr. Davids also stated that the Company did not provide Dr. Linder’s records, and 

therefore he did not offer a clinical opinion with respect to McCann’s diagnosis of OSA. 

(Id.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 24 of 76 PageID: 6912
25

2. Laprade Review 

A clinical consultant for the Company, Maureen M. Laprade, reviewed Dr. 

Linder’s medical records on September 17, 2008. (BATES-712–13.) Laprade 

summarized Dr. Linder’s treatment as follows:

The insured was diagnosed w/OSA on [12-18-06] ... the insured had a 

titration study on [1-25-07] ... after which the insured would have obtained 

a CPAP machine. It appears that the insured started using the CPAP 

around the end of March or beginning of April 2007. The insured was 

having difficulty adapting to using the CPAP & went to ER on [4-10-07] 

.... Dr. Linder dates an APS on [7-15-08] indicating that the insured is 

“probably unable to stay awake for long periods” and has “excessive 

daytime sleepiness despite treatment.” He makes those statements[;] 

however[,] he has not examined the insured since ... [1-25-07.] 

(BATES-712.) Laprade, based on her clinical review, opined as follows:

[T]he insured likely had excessive daytime sleepiness since at least the date 

of diagnosis on [12-18-06.] The insured was having difficulty using the 

CPAP in [4-07] and the insured continued w/being tired all the time in [1-

08.] With the daytime sleepiness[,] the insured likely had and still has 

difficulty being fully alert, concentrating and making critical quick 

decisions. 

(BATES-713.) 

3. Administrative Correspondence: September of 2008–

October of 2008

McCann submitted the Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form for the month of 

September to Provident Life via facsimile dated September 24, 2008. (BATES-717–19.) 

He listed Dr. Coselli as his sole treatment provider on that form. (BATES-719.) 

McCann’s October Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form, which he submitted via 

facsimile on October 27, 2008, stated the same. (BATES-763–65.) That same day, 

McCann called Provident Life for an update regarding: (1) the Company’s Reservation of 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 25 of 76 PageID: 6913
26

Rights for Total Disability; and (2) his Residual Disability claim. (BATES-766.) A 

Provident Life representative informed McCann that both matters remained under review. 

(Id.)

4. Vocational Consultant Review

David P. Gaughan, a Provident Life vocational consultant, submitted a report on 

November 13, 2008 (“11-13-08 Gaughan Vocational Report”). (BATES-767–70.) 

Gaughan reviewed: (1) the Holzer CPT codes from January 2005 to May 2008; and (2) 

the 6-8-08 Job Description Form authored by Dr. Long. (BATES-767.) Gaughan 

confirmed that the 6-8-08 Job Description Form, viewed in combination with the CPT 

codes, were sufficient to verify that McCann’s pre-disability records reflected that 

McCann performed duties related to “Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology prior to 

disability.” (BATES-768.) The 11-13-08 Gaughan Vocational Report provided no 

statistical analysis in support of that finding. (Id.) 

E. Removal of Reservation of Rights and Supplemental 

Administrative Review 

McCann contacted a Provident Life representative via telephone to discuss the 

status of his claim on November 19, 2008. (BATES-786–87.) The Provident Life

representative informed McCann that the Company requested additional records related 

to CPT codes billed in 2005. (Id.)

A Provident Life representative contacted McCann via telephone on December 12, 

2008 to review the status of his claim. (BATES-800–01.) That representative 

documented, inter alia, the following regarding her discussion with McCann:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 26 of 76 PageID: 6914
27

I explained to him that we have completed our outstanding reviews at this 

time and I would like to discuss the results with him. I stated that ... we 

were in the process of preparing the calculations, etc. to consider his 

previous period of [Residual Disability.] I stated that at this time we have 

also received sufficient information to remove [Reservation of Rights] from 

payments going forward .... I explained to the insured that, based on the 

information that we have to date, we began payment based on the date of 

disability [3-10-08.] At this time, based on his diagnosis of aneurysm, we 

considered adjusting date of disability to [12-1-06.] Based on our financial 

review and calculations it appears that the insured did not have a loss of 

income in [12-06], therefore we would consider date of disability [1-1-07.] 

(Id.) 

McCann contacted a Provident Life representative via telephone on December 15, 

2008, and agreed to change the date of disability for Residual Disability benefits to 

January 1, 2007. (BATES-806.) In response, the Provident Life representative agreed to 

“make the necessary adjustments and forward payments” to McCann. (BATES-807.) 

Provident Life sent McCann a letter dated January 6, 2009 to McCann, which confirmed 

that the Company adjusted Date of Disability for McCann’s Residual Disability benefits 

to January 1, 2007. (BATES-801.) That letter also summarized the benefits paid to 

McCann, and stated the following regarding the Company’s withdrawal of Reservation of 

Rights:

... McCann as you are aware, we were previously in the process of 

finalizing our review of your pre-disability occupation and occupational 

duties[.] At this time our vocational rehabilitation consultant has reviewed 

your file and has concluded that the information we have received to date is 

sufficient to verify your pre-disability occupational duties[.] As such, we 

have removed the Reservation of Rights that was applicable on prior 

payments.

(BATES-812.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 27 of 76 PageID: 6915
28

1. Administrative Correspondence: December of 2008

McCann submitted a Claimant’s Disability Statement for the month of December 

on December 23, 2008. (BATES-804–05.) He listed Dr. Coselli as his sole health care 

provider. (BATES-805.) 

2. Medical Records Request 

Provident Life requested medical records, and other notes related to McCann’s 

office visits, consultations, and diagnostic and laboratory tests, from Dr. Linder via letter 

dated January 8, 2009. (BATES-823–24.) Specifically, Provident Life requested 

documents created after June 31, 2008. (BATES-823.) See also supra Sec. I.C.7 

(summarizing medical records that Dr. Linder previously sent to Provident Life). Dr. 

Linder replied via letter dated January 15, 2009, which indicated that McCann had not 

visited his office during the requested time period. (BATES-833–37.)

Provident Life also requested medical records from Dr. Coselli dated after June 1, 

2008 via letter dated January 8, 2009. (BATES-826.) Dr. Coselli did not immediately 

respond. (See id. at 826–30.)

3. Administrative Correspondence: February of 2009–May 

of 2009

McCann submitted a Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form via facsimile dated 

February 4, 2009, stating that he exclusively remained under the care of Dr. Coselli. 

(BATES-870–72.) Provident Life wrote a letter to McCann dated February 5, 2009, 

which stated that Dr. Coselli did not submit an APS for that month. (BATES-873–74.) 

Dr. Coselli later submitted the APS on February 18, 2009 (“2-18-09 Dr. Coselli APS”). 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 28 of 76 PageID: 6916
29

(BATES-888–89.) The 2-18-09 Dr. Coselli APS indicated that McCann had not visited 

his office since the initial 1-30-08 Dr. Coselli Appointment. (BATES-888.) See also

supra Sec. I.B.3 (describing the 1-30-08 Dr. Coselli Appointment). Thus, the 2-18-09 Dr. 

Coselli APS did not state new information with respect to McCann’s medical condition, 

or job-related restrictions, or limitations. See supra Secs. I.B.3; I.C.7 (summarizing the 

4-2-08 Dr. Coselli APS and 7-30-08 Dr. Coselli APS).

Provident Life acknowledged receipt of the 2-18-09 Dr. Coselli APS via letter 

dated February 20, 2009. That letter requested that McCann continue to complete a 

Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form each month. (BATES-896.) Shortly 

thereafter, by letter dated March 5, 2009, Provident Life informed McCann that the 

Company did not receive a Claimant’s Supplement Statement Form or APS for the month 

of March. (BATES-898.) McCann submitted an updated Claimant’s Supplemental 

Statement Form on March 9, 2009. (BATES-902–08.) Dr. Coselli submitted an APS 

form dated March 16, 2009 to Provident Life. (BATES-922–27.) That form did not state 

any new information regarding McCann’s medical status, or job-related restrictions and 

limitations. (BATES-922–27.) See also supra Secs. I.B.3; I.C.7 ; I.E.3 (describing prior 

APS submissions by Dr. Coselli). 

McCann submitted a Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form for the month of 

April via facsimile dated April 6, 2009. (BATES-931–33.) Dr. Coselli submitted the 

April APS statement, which did not state any new information regarding McCann’s 

medical status, or job-related restrictions and limitations, that same day. (BATES-935–

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 29 of 76 PageID: 6917
30

39.) See also supra Secs. I.B.3; I.C.7 ; I.E.3 (describing prior APS submissions by Dr. 

Coselli). 

McCann contacted a Provident Life representative on April 20, 2009 to discuss the 

monthly submission requirement for the Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form and 

APS. (BATES-943.) A Provident Life representative returned his call the following day 

and described McCann’s inquiry, in relevant part, as follows:

I was at the [doctor’s] office having the APS filled out and they said they 

just filled one out and that I am permanently disabled and [the] office does 

not do this for anyone but me. [The doctor’s office] thought I should call 

and check to see if there can be a reduction of the forms ...

(BATES-948.) 

McCann further explained that he did not visit Dr. Coselli or Dr. Linder on a 

frequent basis. (Id.) McCann stated, however, that he underwent a sleep study in 

October of 2008 at Holzer. (Id.) Based upon the results of that sleep study, Dr. Linder 

reduced McCann’s CPAP Machine setting from 12 cm to 11 cm h20. (Id.) McCann also 

stated that he monitored his blood pressure at home, and the readings ranged from 

110/70–140/90. (BATES-949.) According to McCann, the blood pressure readings 

varied depending “on the day” and time measured. (Id.) McCann denied maintaining a 

log to track his blood pressure readings. (Id.) 

The Provident Life representative, in response to McCann’s concern, agreed to 

waive the APS requirement for the next due month. (Id.) The Provident Life 

representative also informed McCann that the Company would request and review the 

results of the October 2008 sleep study at Holzer. (Id.) At the conclusion of the 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 30 of 76 PageID: 6918
31

telephone call, the Provident Life representative stated that he would update McCann 

regarding his submission requirements at a later time. (Id.) Provident Life requested 

medical records from Holzer dated after March 2008 via letter dated April 22, 2009. 

(BATES-956–58.) McCann submitted a Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form for 

the month of May via facsimile dated May 5, 2009. (BATES-980–983.)

4. Clinical Review

Provident Life requested that a medical consulting team, consisting of Dr. Davids, 

and a clinical consultant, Patricia Carroll, review the medical records contained in 

McCann’s claim file. (BATES-995.) Specifically, Dr. Davids and Carroll were asked to 

review McCann’s current treatment plan and opine as to whether his restrictions and 

limitations were supported. (Id.) The administrative record shows that on May 12, 2009, 

the medical consultants, in collaboration with a Provident Life representative, decided 

upon the following “Recommended Action:”

Based upon the information we need to determine that the insured has ... 

stable blood pressure readings. Set up surveillance now and then 

coordinate a 24 hour blood pressure reading. Also coordinate surveillance 

around the time he has the monitor on .... 

(Id.) 

5. Administrative Correspondence: June of 2009 

McCann submitted the June 2009 Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form to 

Provident Life via facsimile dated June 5, 2009. (BATES-1209–12.) McCann contacted 

a Provident Life representative via telephone on June 25, 2009 and requested an update 

regarding the status of his claim. (BATES-1218.) The Provident Life representative 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 31 of 76 PageID: 6919
32

informed McCann that the Company had not received an APS for that month. (Id.) 

McCann stated that he would contact his physician to request an APS form. (Id.) 

6. 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study 

Provident Life scheduled McCann for a 24-hour blood pressure study on July 9, 

2009 (“7-9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study”), at the Heart Center for Excellence in 

Kalamazoo, Michigan, where McCann planned to spend the Fourth of July. (BATES1198; BATES-1202–03.)17 The Company described the 7-9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure 

Study in a letter dated June 4, 2009, which read, in relevant part, as follows: 

We are writing to confirm your rescheduled Diagnostic Study. Provident 

Life and Accident Insurance Company wishes to exercise its contractual 

right to have you examined by an independent medical examiner. 

Please note that failure to attend this examination could affect our ability to 

support the payment of benefits to you under the terms of [the Policy.] 

(BATES-1202.) 

A representative at the Heart Center for Excellence forwarded the results of the 7-

9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study to Provident Life via facsimile dated July 15, 2009. 

(BATES-1244–47.) That document collated McCann’s blood pressure readings obtained 

during the study. (BATES-1245–47.) 

Provident Life forwarded the results of the 7-9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study 

to a clinical representative, Beth O’Brien, and a physician representative, Dr. Alfred 

Parisi. (BATES-1297; BATES-1595.) Upon reviewing those results, the representatives 

concluded as follows in a document dated July 22, 2009: 

 

17 The 7-9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study was initially scheduled for June 8, 2009, but 

McCann requested to reschedule the appointment date. (BATES-1188, BATES-1197.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 32 of 76 PageID: 6920
33

... [T]he systolic BP shows good but not ideal BP control[.] Ideal control 

would be consistently under 120 – the readings indicate that most levels are 

below 140 with a few higher but sometimes go over 120.

The [insured’s] occupation as an interventionalist would involve some 

pushing requirements when putting in a catheter[,] and he would have some 

potential problems doing this[.] The act of pushing does tend to increase 

BP. The [insured] might also have increased stress during a difficult 

procedure[.] 

If the [insured] is an interventional radiologist[,] it is reasonable that he 

would not be able to perform some of the interventional activities[.] If the 

[insured] does not perform much interventional radiology work, he should 

be able to perform many of the sedentary [occupational] requirements[.]

It appears the [insured] is receiving less frequent medical treatment than we 

otherwise might have expected[.] It would be normal for periodic 

assessments by his local physician at least annually[,] and the medical ... 

review suggested updated testing should be obtained in 6 [months.] The 

last known examination ... was [1-30-2008.] The [attending physician] 

noted that the [insured] should get a CT [without] contrast every 6 months 

– there is no indication that this has been done. This would not be 

considered to be appropriate care and it appears the [insured] might be selftreating.

...

[The] prescriptions are being written by Nabil Fahmy, MD[.] However, 

this is the Holzer medical center[,] and they report that there are no current 

records for [the insured.] 

(BATES–1297–98.) 

The Provident Life representatives, based upon the above analysis, recommended 

that the Company: (1) review the CPT codes to determine whether McCann was “mainly 

an interventional radiologist”; (2) assess whether McCann qualified for Total Disability 

or Residual Disability “at most”; (3) obtain medical records from physicians who 

prescribed medication to McCann; and (4) schedule another field interview to determine 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 33 of 76 PageID: 6921
34

how McCann presents and also learn more about McCann’s medical monitoring and 

treatment. (BATES-1298.)18 

7. Administrative Correspondence: July of 2009

McCann submitted a Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form for the month of 

July via facsimile dated July 12, 2009. (BATES-1236–39.) A Provident Life 

representative contacted McCann via telephone on July 23, 2009, and McCann returned 

the telephone call on July 27, 2009. (BATES-1300.) The Provident Life representative 

asked McCann about, inter alia, Dr. Coselli’s treatment. (Id.) McCann explained that Dr. 

Coselli last evaluated his condition in September of 2008, and recommended that he 

undergo a CT scan annually. (Id.) McCann stated that he planned to visit Dr. Coselli the 

following month, in August of 2009, to undergo a follow up CT scan. (Id.) With respect 

to the medical management of his condition, McCann explained that he visited his 

primary care physician, Dr. Fahmy, on an “as needed basis.” (BATES-1300–01.) 

According to McCann, Dr. Fahmy provided his prescription medications. (Id.) 

McCann denied consulting other physicians, with the exception of Dr. Linder. 

(BATES-1301.) He described his condition as “a little better,” but explained that he 

experienced fatigue and sleeping difficulty. (Id.) McCann stated the he continued to 

monitor his blood pressure at home. (Id.)

 

18 Specifically, the medical reviewers recommended that the field interview determine: (1) how 

McCann monitored his condition at home; and (2) the physicians who treated and prescribed 

medications for McCann. (BATES-1298.) In the event that McCann failed to identify treating 

physicians who were not previously disclosed to the Company, the medical reviewers 

recommended informing McCann that he did “not appear to be under appropriate care[.]” (Id.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 34 of 76 PageID: 6922
35

8. Medical Records Request and Review: Dr. Fahmy 

Provident Life contacted Dr. Fahmy, a physician of internal medicine and 

gastroenterologist at Holzer, via letter dated July 30, 2009. (BATES-1404.) The letter 

requested medical records related to McCann’s care from January 1, 2007 to the present. 

(Id.) 

Provident Life received medical records from Dr. Fahmy on August 13, 2009. 

(BATES-1426–59.) Those records summarized Dr. Fahmy’s initial evaluation of 

McCann on April 11, 2007, for symptoms related to shortness of breath and dizziness. 

(BATES-1427.) Dr. Fahmy recorded the following “ASSESSMENT AND PLAN” in 

McCann’s medical chart, which she electronically signed on April 29, 2007: 

1. Patient is currently stable

2. Discussed with the patient his medications, discussed with him 

hypertension and risk of hypertension. He is not on any medication. 

He quit his medication on his own and seemingly has a problem with 

compliance with his medication. Restart him on Lotrel 5/20, asked 

patient to use on a daily basis ....

3. Discussed with the patient his potassium level and BUN creatinine 

and these will be checked on Friday. Re-educated the patient about 

sleep apnea .... Also, educated the patient about obesity and weight 

control, etc. Dietary counseling was recommended and exercise was 

discussed ....

(Id.) 

Dr. Fahmy next assessed McCann during a follow up appointment on November 

15, 2007. (BATES-1437–38.) Dr. Fahmy summarized McCann’s treatment plan, in 

relevant part, as follows:

Hypertension[:] doing well, BP is under good control at home ....

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 35 of 76 PageID: 6923
36

Overweight / Obesity: [Patient] is overweight as per the above weight ... 

Non-compliant with diet and exercise schedule 

(Id.) 

McCann next visited Dr. Fahmy on January 11, 2008 for the evaluation and 

treatment of a cough. (BATES-1439–40.) With respect to McCann’s hypertension, Dr. 

Fahmy reported that McCann was “doing well, BP ... under control at home ....” 

(BATES-1439.) Dr. Fahmy also documented that McCann remained “overweight” and 

noncompliant “with diet and exercise schedule.” (BATES-1439.) 

Dr. Fahmy ordered a follow up CT scan with contrast, which McCann underwent 

on September 29, 2008. (BATES-1442.) The accompanying diagnostic report for that 

CT scan stated, inter alia, there was “[n]o change in the degree of minimal dilation of the 

ascending aorta since [the] previous study.” (Id.) McCann also visited Dr. Fahmy on 

September 30, 2008, for “a recheck for hyperlipidemia and other multiple problems[.]” 

(BATES-1450.) Dr. Fahmy documented that McCann complained of “some shortness of 

breath” and also noted that McCann appeared concerned about aortic aneurysm, which 

she characterized as asymptomatic. (Id.) Dr. Fahmy noted that McCann was “disabled 

because of the acute aneurysm” and recommended that McCann continue to monitor his 

blood pressure at home. (BATES-1451.) 

McCann also visited Dr. Fahmy on July 21, 2009 for the evaluation and treatment 

of “hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and other multiple problems.” (BATES-1458.) Dr. 

Fahmy described that McCann was “generally doing ok with no new problems[.]” (Id.) 

With respect to McCann’s blood pressure, Dr. Fahmy adopted a treatment plan to 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 36 of 76 PageID: 6924
37

“continue same medication” and recommended continued blood pressure monitoring. 

(BATES-1459.) 

9. Statistical Vocational Review

Christina Lubin, a vocational analyst for Provident Life, reviewed the CPT codes 

for procedures McCann performed from 2005 to 2008 on September 4, 2009. (BATES1594–95.) Specifically, the Company asked Lubin to “determine the percentage of 

interventional vs. diagnostic procedures performed by” McCann during that timeframe. 

(BATES-1595.) Lubin collated the data in the following charts (“9-4-09 Vocational 

Analysis Charts”), which compared the percentage of interventional procedures 

performed by McCann to the percentage of diagnostic procedures performed by McCann 

during the years 2005 to 2008:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 37 of 76 PageID: 6925
38

(BATES-1541.)19

The Company forwarded the 9-4-09 Vocational Analysis Charts to another 

vocational consultant, Andrea L. Coraccio, on September 9, 2009. (BATES1594–95.) 

The Company asked Coraccio to compare McCann’s income from interventional 

radiological procedures to McCann’s income from diagnostic radiological procedures 

 

19 Provident Life analyzes the data in the following charts, which are easier to interpret:

The 2008 data in the above chart carries onto a following page, which accounts for the space 

between the heading for the 2008 data and accompanying percentages. (Dkt. 93-2 at 22–23.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 38 of 76 PageID: 6926
39

from 2005 to 2008. (BATES-1595.) Coraccio authored a report dated September 9, 

2009 (“9-9-09 Vocational Report”), which stated the following:

The file contains CPT reports for the time periods of 2005 – [5-2008]. Our 

CPT Analyst created a spreadsheet to determine intervention[al] v. 

diagnostic procedures. Please refer to CPT Review ... dated [9-4-09]. 

Interventional charges accounted for 11% – 18% of total charges. I would 

note that the highest percentage of interventional charges was in 2008. 

Interventional units accounted for 6% - 11% of total units ....

(Id.)

The 9-9-09 Vocational Report also summarized McCann’s annual and average 

monthly charges for 2005 through 2008 with respect to both interventional and diagnostic 

procedures. (BATES-1595–96.) The Court provides those values below:

 2005: $3,209,630 (average monthly charges of $267,469) 

 2006: $5,052,304 (average monthly charges of $421,025)

 2007: $4,775,858 (average monthly charges of $397,988)

 2008 (1-08–5-08): $768,263 (average monthly charges of $153,652)

(Id.) 

10. Follow Up Consultation with Dr. Coselli and 

Accompanying Correspondence

McCann visited Dr. Coselli for a follow up appointment, CT scan, and 

echocardiogram on August 10, 2009 (“8-10-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment”). (BATES1689–97.) Dr. Coselli reported that McCann did not complain of any symptoms at that 

time. (BATES-1689.) According to the treatment note from the 8-10-09 Dr. Coselli 

Appointment, which was signed by Katherine A. Loring, Nurse Practitioner, McCann 

requested that Dr. Coselli continue to process his disability claim. (Id.) McCann 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 39 of 76 PageID: 6927
40

complained that his job “as an interventional radiologist [was] so stressful to him that 

during procedures his BP was ‘out of control.’” (Id.) Nurse Practitioner Loring 

described her discussion with McCann with respect to his disability status as follows:

I did discuss with him that his aorta is really not a size we would 

recommend he need disability and that many people with much larger 

aortas continue to work. I suggested he possibly try to do just regular 

radiology as a way to continue work but with less stress[.]

...

McCann following his visit discussed with me [that] returning to work at 

this time would be very difficult with him. He outlined he had severe OSA, 

he reports he was falling asleep at work and was so fatigued that his work 

load had to be reduced and eventually he was not doing any work. The 

medical practice he belonged to was getting ready to fire him because he 

wasn’t contributing. He also reports great difficulty with keeping his BP 

under control while doing his job .... Now that he has been off work for a 

year, his BP is very good. He is working with the sleep lab to fine tune his 

[CPAP Machine] and he is sleeping better although he does report he can 

easily fall asleep while in the middle of activities or driving. Now he has 

been off work for such a long time he feels his skills have been lost ... 

[and] tells me nobody will hire him so he can’t work[.]

(Id.) 

The treatment notes that accompanied the 8-10-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment stated 

that McCann was not in “apparent distress” during that exam. (Id.) The results of the CT 

scan identified “some increase” in the size of the aortic aneurysm; however, Dr. Coselli 

noted that the increase may have been attributable to “differences in measurement 

techniques.” (BATES-1692.) Based upon those results and medical examination, Dr. 

Coselli did not recommend surgical treatment. (Id.) Instead, Dr. Coselli recommended 

that McCann maintain tight blood pressure control, lose weight, and avoid heavy lifting 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 40 of 76 PageID: 6928
41

and extreme activities, and advised McCann to undergo a CT scan and echocardiogram in 

one year. (Id.) 

McCann visited Dr. Coselli on September 9, 2009, along with his brother to 

discuss “his concern about his inability to return to his former occupation due to his 

disability” and Dr. Coselli’s “concern that [the office] could no longer follow the 

management of his disability[.]” (BATES-1688.) Dr. Coselli described that conversation 

in a “Progress Note” dated September 9, 2009, which stated the following:

We discussed the terminology of permanent and total disability and we 

agreed to disagree regarding the sequencing of events. The fact remains 

that over the past two years following him, his aorta has been essentially 

stable[.] Surgery is not indicated at this time – the size does not indicate 

intervention and although there is a 30% chance that he will need surgery, it 

may not be for 5, 10 or 20 years. 

...

Continued observation includes a CT Scan every 12 months, for us to 

evaluate as to changes in size or character of [McCann’s] Ascending 

aorta[.] There is limited risk in waiting, and it is much lower than the risk 

of surgery at this time. I believe it is in the best interest of ... McCann and 

our office for him to be closely followed by the physician of his choice 

locally in New Jersey and to have careful management of his hypertension,

which was elevated at today’s appointment, weight loss and Obstructive 

Sleep Apnea, and to manage his disability plan and program. It is far more 

appropriate for us to monitor his annual CT scans and monitor his aortic 

artery diameters. 

(Id.) 

Dr. Coselli memorialized that discussion in a letter dated September 9, 2009, and 

addressed to McCann (“9-9-09 Dr. Coselli Letter”). (BATES-1687.) That letter stated, 

in relevant part:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 41 of 76 PageID: 6929
42

It was a pleasure to see you in consultation today as a followup to your 

August 10, 2009 office visit and monitoring exams .... I am pleased to note 

that your aortic aneurysm has had only minimal increase in size since the 

January 2008 study increasing from 4.0 cm to the current 4.3 cm .... The 

aortic root is mildly enlarged but no structural abnormalities are noted in 

the aortic valve 

....

As in the original letters to Holzer Clinic, your disability classification 

remains unchanged. Our office, though happy to monitor your aorta 

studies, is not a medical practice, but surgical. We ask that you consult 

your primary care physician to coordinate and manage your care ... as 

becomes necessary ....

(BATES-1687.) 

Provident Life sent a letter to Dr. Coselli dated October 8, 2009, which requested 

medical records dated after January 9, 2008. (BATES-1627–28.) Dr. Coselli did not 

immediately respond. See infra Sec. I.E.10.

11. Follow Up In-Person Interview

The Provident Life field representative, Ralph E. Olson, scheduled a follow up 

field visit with McCann on October 12, 2009 at McCann’s residence in Manahawkin, 

New Jersey. (BATES-1632.) Olson authored a report to summarize the 45-minute field 

visit, which stated the following: 

... McCann said he remains unable to work as a radiologist since March 10, 

2008 from an aortic aneurysm, sleep apnea, and high blood pressure. He 

said his aortic aneurysm remains life threatening. He said he is still unable 

to perform any activity to the extreme. He said actor, John Ritter, died of 

an aortic aneurysm. 

We discussed appropriate care and proof of loss. The insured said he treats 

with Joseph Coselli, MD, an expert in the field of aortic aneurysm ... 

McCann said he is in the process of selecting a primary care physician in 

the Manahawkin area to complete claim forms. 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 42 of 76 PageID: 6930
43

....

... McCann said he monitors his blood pressure a few times per week[.] He 

said he uses a standard blood pressure device[.] He said he does not keep a 

log of his blood pressure reading[s]. He said he remains on prescribed 

medication, and his blood pressure usually reads 120/70. 

(BATES-1654.)20 

McCann also told Olson about the medical care provided by Dr. Fahmy, Dr. 

Linder, and Dr. Coselli. (BATES-1656.) McCann described how his medical conditions 

impacted his former employment. (Id.) Although McCann reported “no significant 

changes in his restrictions and limitations,” McCann told Olson that he was unable to 

tolerate the stress and fatigue associated with his former position. (Id.) According to 

McCann, he experienced difficulty focusing and concentrating on his work as a 

radiologist, and reported experiencing “dangerously” high blood pressure readings in his 

former work environment. (BATES-1656–57.) McCann reported that Holzer terminated 

his employment, and he stated that he could not return to work as a radiologist due to the 

high risk for further dilation of his aorta. (Id.) 

F. New Physician: Dr. Lombardi 

1. Initial Appointment

McCann selected Dr. David Lombardi, a board-certified internist, as his primary 

care physician in New Jersey. (See BATES-1643.) Dr. Lombardi evaluated McCann on 

October 22, 2009, and anticipated that his next examination would occur in February of 

 

20 It appears that Olson incorrectly dated the report “October 27, 2008,” however, various 

correspondence by Provident Life confirm that the field visit occurred in October of 2009. 

(BATES-1654; see also BATES-1632.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 43 of 76 PageID: 6931
44

2010. (BATES-1642.) McCann submitted an October APS by Dr. Lombardi, via 

facsimile dated October 22, 2009 (“10-22-09 Dr. Lombardi APS”). (BATES-1641–43.) 

The 10-22-09 Dr. Lombardi APS identified McCann’s primary diagnosis as “thoracic 

ascending aortic aneurysm” and secondary diagnosis as sleep apnea. The 10-22-09 Dr. 

Lombardi APS also stated that Dr. Lombardi’s treatment plan was to provide “medical

therapy” and “ongoing surveillance with CAT scans.” (Id.) Dr. Lombardi described 

McCann’s prognosis as “fair,” and stated that McCann was unable to do “work of any 

kind due to cardiac condition.” (BATES-1643.) With respect to job-related restrictions 

and limitations, Dr. Lombardi simply stated that McCann could not complete “work of 

any kind due to [his] cardiac condition.” (BATES-1642.)

2. Medical Records Request and Review 

Provident Life sent a letter dated October 27, 2009 to Dr. Lombardi and requested 

medical records related to McCann’s care. (BATES-1651.) Dr. Lombardi responded via 

facsimile that same day, and indicated that McCann had visited his office on one 

occasion. (BATES-1666–67.) Dr. Lombardi also sent Provident Life a two-page form 

entitled “COMPLETE PHYSICAL.” (BATES-1675–77.) That form contained details 

regarding Dr. Lombardi’s examination of McCann on October 22, 2009, and stated that 

McCann’s blood pressure readings were 145/88 and 130/78. (BATES-1677.) 

G. Dr. Coselli’s Response to Records Request

Dr. Coselli responded to Provident Life’s request for medical records via facsimile 

dated November 4, 2009. (BATES-1684–86.) He provided medical documents related 

to, inter alia, the 8-10-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment. (Id.) The facsimile also included a 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 44 of 76 PageID: 6932
45

letter addressed to a Provident Life representative, which stated, in relevant part, as 

follows:

We are in receipt of the last two disability claim requests forwarded to our 

office .... Please find included a letter forwarded to ... McCann following 

his last office encounters at our center in August and September 2009. We 

are pleased that his aortic aneurysm has only shown minimal change and 

his Echocardiogram is good. Surgery on his aorta may never be indicated, 

assuming he can optimize his health by tighter medical management. In 

that he lives in New Jersey it is therefore, more practical and cost effective 

for his medical doctors in his community to manage the three medical 

problems which impact his overall health and ultimately, his aorta. They 

include: hypertension management to achieve a blood pressure of 120/70; 

medical management of his obstructive sleep apnea; and weight loss that 

affects his blood pressure, OSA and cardiac function 

....

Though we will be happy to review and consult on his annual CT scans of 

his aorta and Echocardiogram studies, this is not a medical practice, but 

surgical. We insist that his ongoing coordination of his disability and 

management of his care be directed to his primary care physician in New 

Jersey. That would be David Lombardi ... in Howell, NJ ....

(BATES-1686.) 

Provident Life also received a copy of the 9-9-09 Dr. Coselli Letter, discussed 

supra Sec. I.E.10. (BATES-1687.) 

H. Administrative Correspondence: November of 2009

McCann contacted a Provident Life representative on November 4, 2009 to 

discuss the status of his disability check and to notify Provident Life of an address 

change. (BATES-1682–83.) Provident Life informed McCann that the Company did not 

receive the Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form for that month. (BATES-1682.) 

McCann, in response, requested that the Company initiate auto payments so that he did 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 45 of 76 PageID: 6933
46

not have to submit a Claimant’s Supplemental Statement Form. (Id.) The Provident Life 

representative responded as follows:

I said not at this time[.] Actually, when he receives the benefit check he 

should complete the claim form and return it to me asap.

I said after review of medical records requested we can reduce frequency of 

APS if appropriate, but his portion of the form is needed on a monthly 

basis.

(Id.) 

McCann, at the conclusion of the telephone call, informed the Provident Life 

representative that Dr. Lombardi was his new primary care physician. (BATES-1683.)

I. Medical Records Request: Dr. Linder

Provident Life sent a letter to Dr. Linder dated November 12, 2009. (BATES1717.) That letter was captioned “URGENT REQUEST,” and asked Dr. Linder to 

submit medical documents related to office notes and sleep studies, dated March 1, 2009 

to the present, to Provident Life. (Id.) 

J. Second Medical Review 

A medical review team consisting of, inter alia, Dr. Parisi, O’Brien, and Dr. Alfred 

I. Kaplan, a pulmonary consultant, reviewed McCann’s claim file on November 14, 2009. 

(BATES-1740–42.) That team found the following:

... [McCann] claims to be impaired due to an aneurysm, hypertension, and 

sleep apnea but he reports his disability is primarily due to an aneurysm. 

The CPT codes indicate that 11% to 18% of the total charges were for 

interventional radiology with 6% to 11% of the total units due to 

interventional radiology.

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 46 of 76 PageID: 6934
47

The blood pressure readings are primarily normal (according to the medical 

records from the Heart Center for Excel) – 24 hour ambulatory monitoring 

(July 2009) showing adequate blood pressure control[.] 

The sleep apnea has not been treated because ... [McCann] could not 

tolerate the [CPAP Machine]. There is a reference in some more recent 

notes that ... [McCann] is “doing well on C-Pap[.]”

...

Parisi noted that the aneurysm is mild and ... [McCann’s] specialist (Dr. 

Coselli) has not indicated ... [McCann] cannot work due to the aneurysm 

.... McCann’s new PCP Dr. Lombardi noted ... that [McCann] is “doing 

well on C-Pap[.]” 

(BATES-1741–42.)

Based upon the above findings, the team developed “Recommendations” to: (1) 

send the results of the 7-9-09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study to Dr. Lombardi; (2) obtain 

and review McCann’s sleep studies; and (3) refer the file to Dr. Parisi and O’Brien for 

further medical review. (Id.) 

1. Initial Contacts with Dr. Lombardi

Pursuant to the medical team’s recommendation, the Company contacted Dr. 

Lombardi via facsimile dated November 18, 2009. (BATES-1746–72.) That facsimile 

included Dr. Coselli’s notes from the 9-9-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment, the 9-9-09 Dr. 

Coselli Letter, and the results of the 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study. (BATES-1748; 

BATES–64.)

Dr. Kaplan, at the request of the Company, also contacted Dr. Lombardi via 

telephone to inquire as to the date of McCann’s latest sleep study. (BATES-1765.) A 

representative for Dr. Lombardi informed Dr. Kaplan that the office: (1) had no record of 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 47 of 76 PageID: 6935
48

a recent sleep study; and (2) did not have information about McCann’s compliance with 

the CPAP Machine. (Id.) 

2. O’Brien Medical Review

O’Brien reviewed McCann’s medical records and completed a report dated 

November 23, 2009. (BATES-1773–77.) That report contained a “Clinical Analysis” 

section wherein O’Brien stated, inter alia, as follows:

The updated medical records noted the insured treats with a new provider a 

Dr[.] Lombardi ... and he is also his [attending physician.] Medical records 

are few but stated the insured has chronic disability due to thoracic 

aneurysm[.] The insured noted his B/P readings at work were “out of 

control” and while he is not working they have become better ... he checks 

his B/P a few times a week and he usually is 120/70[.] Blood pressure from 

7-09 was reviewed by [on site physician] ... and the insured was found to 

have good systolic control but not ideal B/P control. Most readings were 

under 140 with a few noted higher. Please note that our [on site physician] 

... noted the insured may have difficulties with interventional activities -

pushing requirements when inserting a catheter. It was further noted the 

insured “should be able to perform many of the sedentary occupational 

requirements.”

(BATES-1776.) O’Brien, with respect to Dr. Coselli’s care, noted the following:

Dr. Cosseli’s [sic] ... records noted the insured’s aortic aneurysm ... 

minimally changed [since] his last scan of 1-08. His [aortic aneurysm] 

measured 4.0 [cm] in 1-08 to current measurement of 4.3 cm. The 

echocardiogram revealed a ... left ventricle ejection fraction ... of 65–69%, 

which is a normal ejection fraction. Dr. Cosseli [sic] continued to 

recommend medical management[,] which included [hypertension] 

management, weight loss and avoidance of heavy lifting and extreme 

exertional activities. Please note it appears Dr. Coselli also reported he will 

no longer manage the insured’s disability .... [He] noted the insured may 

want to just do “regular radiology” as a way of work with less stress ...

(Id.) O’Brien, at the conclusion of the report, made the following findings and 

recommendations:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 48 of 76 PageID: 6936
49

At this time, Dr. Coselli’s records noted the insured’s [aortic aneurysm] 

was stable and is to be medically managed. It appears he is no longer 

attesting to [restrictions and limitations] from this condition[.] Records 

noted conditions of hypertension and sleep apnea that need to be further 

reviewed ....

(BATES-1776–77.)

3. Dr. Parisi Review

Dr. Parisi reviewed McCann’s medical file on December 3, 2009. (BATES-1799–

1806.) Dr. Parisi drafted an accompanying report, and completed the “Summary of 

Pertinent History and Clinical Findings” section as follows:

My review of this file confirms that the clinical analysis summary of ... 

O’Brien ... gives an accurate overview of the medical issues related to this 

claim ...

(BATES-1802.) Dr. Parisi completed the “Analysis/Rationale” section of the report as 

follows:

Claimant has hypertension with evidence of hypertensive cardiovascular 

disease manifest[ed] by mild left ventricular hypertrophy and dilation of the 

ascending aorta and arch .... Blood pressures that he has manifest[ed] in the 

above encounters and in particular as shown by ... [the 7-9-09 24-Hour 

Blood Pressure Study] are not in the range that one would restrict sedentary 

or light working responsibilities[.] His ascending aorta has not dilated to 

range where rupture is threatening (>5.0 cm) and has been relatively stable 

over the above period of observation. Working on a regular schedule of no 

greater than 50 hours per week with no night call or [night] hours ... would 

allow claimant to have ample opportunity for regular diet, adequate rest, 

time for exercise and relaxation and management of his sleep disorder to 

promote proper control of his hypertension[.]

The little information we have in the file indicates that claimant does have 

severe sleep apnea; the extent to which this has been corrected with CPAP 

to the present time is unclear as there are no sleep studies in the file after 

the initial CPAP titration of [1-25-07.]

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 49 of 76 PageID: 6937
50

Claimant’s hyperlipidemia is not an impairing condition. His obesity is not 

of a degree that would preclude sedentary or light physical work.

There is no indication that claimant is suffering from any medication 

related side effects from his present [pharmaceutical] treatment ....

(BATES-1805–06.)

Dr. Parisi also noted that the 7-15-08 Dr. Linder APS stated that McCann was 

unable to stay alert for long periods. (BATES-1806.) In light of that statement, Dr. 

Parisi recommended that Provident Life obtain a “[f]ull set of [Dr. Linder’s] records 

along with all sleep studies undertaken ... to perform [a] whole person analysis.” (Id.) 

Dr. Parisi identified Dr. Kaplan as an appropriate physician to review those medical 

records. (Id.) 

4. Dr. Linder Medical Records Review 

Provident Life requested McCann’s medical records from Dr. Linder from March 

1, 2009 to the present in a letter dated December 3, 2009. (BATES-1782–83.) Provident 

Life received a response from Dr. Linder that same day. (BATES-1787.) The response 

included the results of McCann’s sleep study, which occurred on March 2, 2009 (“3-2-09 

Sleep Study”). (BATES-1787–98.) The “Summary” section of the 3-2-09 Sleep Study 

stated that McCann’s sleep apnea improved with the utilization of the CPAP Machine. 

(BATES-1789.) Dr. Linder recommended reducing the ordered CPAP Machine setting 

from 12 cm h20 to 11 cm h20. (BATES-1789.) 

Provident Life forwarded Dr. Linder’s medical records to Dr. Kaplan for further 

review on December 3, 2009. (BATES-1813.) Specifically, the Company asked Dr. 

Kaplan to review the results of the 3-2-09 Sleep Study. (Id.) Dr. Kaplan summarized the 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 50 of 76 PageID: 6938
51

3-2-09 Sleep Study – and subsequent notations made by Dr. Fahmy related to McCann’s 

OSA – as follows:

The [3-2-09 Sleep Study] indicated that at 11cm h20 the insured’s apneas 

were ablated ... On [7-21-09] the office note of Dr. Fahmy states that on 

[the CPAP Machine] the insured was “doing relatively OK[.]” 

(BATES-1813.) 

Based upon the above review and summary, Dr. Kaplan provided the following 

clinical opinion with respect to McCann’s OSA:

Based on this information it is my opinion that the insured was tolerating 

the CPAP well and was not symptomatic from the sleep apnea[.] 

Consequently he is not experiencing impairing daytime somnolence. 

(Id.)

5. Dr. Parisi Contact with Dr. Lombardi

Dr. Parisi contacted Dr. Lombardi via letter dated December 8, 2009 to “schedule 

a brief call ... to obtain clarification of ... McCann’s functional capacity.” (BATES1818.) Dr. Parisi further stated:

I do not make claim decisions. The purpose of my call is not to influence 

your management but to make sure our information is complete and to 

ascertain whether our interpretation of the records would accord with yours 

with regards to [McCann’s] work capacity and if not what would be the 

basis for any difference of opinion. 

(Id.) 

Dr. Parisi also explained that, based upon his review of McCann’s visit with Dr. 

Lombardi on October 22, 2009, Dr. Parisi concluded that McCann should: (1) not lift 

heavy objects “(> 50 lbs)”; (2) restrict work hours to 50 hours per week; and (3) not work 

night call or night shift hours. (Id.) Dr. Parisi made those recommendations in light of 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 51 of 76 PageID: 6939
52

his finding that McCann’s “thoracic aneurysm was not large and relatively stable, that his 

hypertension was reasonably controlled on medication and he was doing well with CPAP 

treatment for sleep apnea.” (Id.) 

Dr. Parisi spoke to Dr. Lombardi via telephone on December 10, 2009. 

(BATES-1821.) Dr. Parisi, via a letter addressed to Dr. Lombardi dated December 

10, 2009, characterized that telephone conversation as follows:

I reviewed ... McCann’s background history indicating that he stopped full 

time work as a radiologist when he was supported by the opinion of 

consulting cardiothoracic surgeon Dr. Coselli that he should not work 

because of his thoracic aortic aneurysm. He had a background history of 

sleep apnea, hypertension and the later discovered 4.0–4.5 cm thoracic 

aortic aneurysm. Based on recent adequate control of his hypertension and 

sleep apnea and the stability of his aneurysm I indicated that it was my 

opinion that ... McCann could work as a radiologist with the restrictions of 

no heavy lifting > 50 lbs, maintain a regular schedule not to exceed 50 

hours per week with no night shift work and no night call.

I further explained that based on further follow-up with this patient Dr. 

Coselli had subsequently written [Provident Life] deferring disability 

determination to his primary care physician. You indicated you had seen 

... McCann on one occasion and based on information you had from Dr. 

Coselli at the time of this visit you were obliged to indicate that ... 

McCann should not work as a radiologist. You indicated that if Dr. Coselli 

felt [McCann] could work as a radiologist that you would not disagree with 

that opinion. 

(BATES-1825.)

Dr. Parisi, at the conclusion of the letter, requested that Dr. Lombardi review and 

add any additional comments to the letter, and return it to him via facsimile or regular 

mail. (Id.) Dr. Lombardi reviewed the letter, and responded via letter dated December 

17, 2009, which stated the following, in relevant part: 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 52 of 76 PageID: 6940
53

I have reviewed the most recent letter from Dr. Coselli’s office dated 

September 2009 and prior letters. I have included them for your review. In 

these letters, Dr. Coselli, the cardiothoracic surgeon, states that ... McCann 

is fully and permanently disabled due to his condition. He indicates that the 

aneurysm has increased in size since a prior study. I now oversee ... 

McCann’s general medical care. Given the documentation and 

recommendations of the cardiothoracic surgeon, I, therefore, agree and 

support ... McCann’s ongoing disability application. 

(BATES-1850.) 

The letter did not address Dr. Coselli’s statements that he did not believe McCann 

qualified for disability based upon the aortic aneurysm, discussed supra Sec. I.E.10, or 

identify job-related restrictions of limitations. (BATES-1850.) Dr. Parisi reviewed Dr. 

Lombardi’s reply letter on December 22, 2009. (BATES-1860.) Dr. Parisi’s opinion that 

McCann did not qualify for Total Disability benefits, however, remained unchanged. 

(Id.)

21

 Dr. Parisi defended his conclusion by summarizing each of McCann’s medical 

 

21 Dr. Parisi described his disagreement with Dr. Lombardi, on a form entitled “DESIGNATED 

MEDICAL OFFICER OPINION – Referral and Response Form,” in relevant part as follows: 

In follow-up visit to Dr. Coselli [8-10-09] it was documented that his 

thoracic aneurysm had minimally (if at all) increased in size. 

....

... [McCann] had initial and only visit with his present [primary care 

provider] Dr. Lombardi [10-22-09.] .... He has supported disability ... in a 

letter response to me based on the thoracic aneurysm taking into account 

opinion of Dr. Coselli ... ignoring the opinion in the [8-10-09 Dr. Coselli 

Appointment] ...

...

As claimant’s thoracic aneurysm is small and not rapidly enlarging over a 

two year period of observation I did not find it to be a contraindication to 

performing light work as defined by US Dept. of Labor DOT. 

....

I have thus concluded considering ... McCann as a whole person that he 

has work capacity at a light level ... based on the combination of the 

above medical conditions ...

(BATES-1868.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 53 of 76 PageID: 6941
54

conditions. (BATES-1860–61.) With respect to the aortic aneurysm, Dr. Parisi opined, 

in relevant part, as follows:

... [McCann’s] thoracic aortic aneurysm is small ... and has not changed 

appreciably in size if at all over two years of observation with repeated 

thoracic imaging studies. [T]horacic aortic aneurysms are not a threat to 

rupture until they are over 5 cm in size. Dr. Coselli has indicated that many 

individuals with larger aortas continued to work and suggested that 

claimant could do some work as a radiologist. As claimant’s thoracic 

aneurysm is small and not rapidly increasing in size it is not a condition that 

justifies avoidance of light sedentary work.

(BATES-1861.) Dr. Parisi stated the following with respect to McCann’s diagnoses of 

hypertension and OSA:

[McCann’s] hypertension is adequately controlled as evidenced by the [7-9-

09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study]. Typically one would not restrict work 

with blood pressures at this level but would continue to monitor them under 

working conditions making adjustments as appropriate if pressure becomes 

less well controlled.

Most recent information indicates his sleep apnea is well controlled as 

supported by [Dr. Kaplan’s] review ... completed [12-3-09.] 

(Id.) 

Based upon the above analysis, and upon considering McCann “as a whole 

person” for the purpose of the claim determination, Dr. Parisi concluded McCann had a 

“work capacity at a light level” and could work with appropriate restrictions. (Id.) Dr. 

Parisi described appropriate restrictions as follows:

I find support for no heavy lifting (> 50 lbs frequently) as this would raise 

blood pressure with adverse effects on his aneurysm and heart, no 

excessive work hours (>50/week) as this would interfere with lifestyle 

modifications (diet, exercise, adequate periods of relaxation) promoting 

weight control and fitness which have beneficial effect on blood pressure 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 54 of 76 PageID: 6942
55

management; no night call or night shift hours as this has the potential to 

confound his sleeping disorder.

(Id.) 

Dr. Parisi also pointed out that Dr. Lombardi failed to consider Dr. Coselli’s 

opinion that McCann’s aortic aneurysm was not at a size where he would recommend 

disability, and that “many people with much larger aortas continue to work.” (BATES1860.) 

K. Occupational Analysis 

Coraccio reviewed McCann’s file and drafted an accompanying “Occupational 

Analysis” report dated December 14, 2009 (“12-14-09 Occupational Analysis Report”). 

(BATES 1830–34.) Coraccio described the methodology underlying the 12-14-09 

Occupational Analysis Report as follows:

On [9-9-09] I received the CPT Analysis completed by our in-house CPT 

Analyst, Christina Lubin, in order to provide comment regarding ... 

[McCann’s] occupational duties. Reports for 2005–[5-2008] were 

reviewed. I determined that the majority of ... [McCann’s] units and 

charges were derived from diagnostic radiology (reading films). 

Interventional radiology never accounted for more than 18% of charges or 

11% of units.

(BATES-1833.)

Coraccio described the Company’s investigation of McCann’s occupational 

history as follows:

A field representative met with the insured on [10-12-09] .... During this 

meeting, the insured indicated that he was employed by ... Holzer ... as an 

Interventional Radiologist since 2005. He reported that he interpreted CAT 

scans, x-rays, MRIs and ultrasounds by sitting in front of a computer 

monitor. He indicated that he also performed invasive/interventional 

procedures such as angiograms, angioplasties, stent replacements, etc. He 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 55 of 76 PageID: 6943
56

performed fluoroscopies from a standing position wearing a lead apron. 

The insured reported working 60 hours per week and being on call at night 

and on weekends.

(Id.)

Based upon the CPT analysis and McCann’s occupational history, Coraccio 

reached the following conclusion:

... [McCann] reasonably spent the majority of his time reading films and 

dictating interpretive reports. Interventional procedures appear to have 

been performed on an occasional basis, based on the units illustrated by the 

CPT reports .... [indicating that McCann] performed an average of 81% 

more diagnostic than interventional procedures each week. 

(BATES-1833–34.)

Coraccio compared the physical demands for McCann in his capacity as a 

diagnostic radiologist to the physical demands for McCann in his capacity as an 

interventional radiologist. (BATES-1834.) According to Coraccio, diagnostic radiology 

required McCann to “sit in front of computer screens to view images.” She noted that 

diagnostic radiology reports are usually dictated. (Id.) In contrast, as an interventional 

radiologist, McCann was required to “stand, bend at the neck and waist, twist, reach, 

grasp equipment, and wear a lead apron for protection.” (Id.) Coraccio described, 

however, that interventional radiology does not require “[l]ifting > 50 lbs,” and that 

“[l]ead aprons vary in weight depending on the material .... [f]or an average male, they 

typically weigh between 13 lbs–23 lbs.” (Id.) 

Coraccio, based upon the physical demands imposed within the fields of 

diagnostic radiology and interventional radiology, opined as follows:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 56 of 76 PageID: 6944
57

The demands of this occupation as performed by ... [McCann] do not 

exceed the supported restrictions and limitations. As noted above, the 

majority of ... [McCann’s] practice was diagnostic radiology which 

involves sitting at a computer to read films. It would appear reasonable that 

... [McCann] could work in a practice in which he can work a consistent 

shift and not take the night call.

(Id.)

L. Final Medical Review

The Company forwarded McCann’s claim file to Dr. Costas T. Lambrew, a 

designated medical offer, for another medical review on December 22, 2009.22 (BATES1870–74.) Dr. Lambrew reviewed, inter alia, the medical records of Dr. Fahmy, Dr. 

Linder, Dr. Coselli, and Dr. Lombardi, and summarized the relevant records in his report. 

(BATES-1872–73.) Dr. Lambrew described McCann’s current medical status, in 

relevant part, as follows:

Dr. Linder commented on the improvement and reduced CPAP pressure 11 

cm [h20] without oxygen supplementation[.] While the claimant has not 

lost weight as recommended, his hypertension has been controlled .... 

Ambulatory blood pressures were recorded [in the 7-9-09 24-Hour Blood 

Pressure Study] .... Average blood pressure while awake was 125/76, and 

while asleep was 112/57 .... He reports no symptoms related to 

hypertension .... Other than the aortic involvement, there is no evidence of 

hypertensive and organ involvement that would impose [restrictions and 

limitations] that would preclude sustained, full time light level work. 

(Id.) 

 

22 Pursuant to Provident Life’s policies and procedures, an independent physician must review 

disagreements between an insured’s attending physician and Provident Life’s consulting 

physician. (Dkt. 93-2 at 27.) Here, Dr. Lambrew reviewed the disagreement as to whether 

McCann’s medical condition qualified him for Total Disability benefits – between Dr. Lombardi 

and Dr. Parisi – without granting deference to either physician. (Id.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 57 of 76 PageID: 6945
58

Based upon the analysis above, Dr. Lambrew agreed with Dr. Parisi that McCann 

was capable of performing a modified work schedule. (BATES-1873–74.) Dr. Lambrew 

described the basis of that conclusion as follows:

[A]neurysm of the ascending [a]orta ... is asymptomatic and was 

incidentally discovered by CT scan of the chest in January of 2008 and has 

no[t] changed significantly .... Dr. Coselli, based on the stability of the 

aneurysm, stated that the chances of the aneurysm growing large enough to 

indicate surgery was 30%, but when this might occur was not predictable, 

and could take 5, 10 or 20 years. He stated he could not support disability 

because of the presence of this stable aneurysm, and that there was no 

reason that ... [McCann] could not work as a radiologist, without the 

perceived stress of interventional work .... The claimant’s hypertension has 

been controlled, as reflected by his recorded home pressures and the [7-9-

09 24-Hour Blood Pressure Study ....] 

(BATES-1873.)

Dr. Lambrew, based on the above analysis, opined that McCann could perform 

“[s]ustained, full time light work as a non interventional Radiologist, with a restriction of 

no heavy lifting, and reduction of ... [McCann’s] perceived stress by working no more 

than 50 hours.” (Id.) Dr. Lambrew did not find that the “stable aneurysm” precluded 

McCann from taking night shift hours or on-call shifts. (Id.) 

M. Termination 

1. Voicemail Notification

A Provident Life representative left McCann a voicemail on December 22, 2009, 

stating that the Company’s latest medical review found that McCann was restricted from: 

(1) lifting greater than 50 lbs; (2) working greater than 50 hours per week; and (3) 

working night call hours. (BATES-1876.) The representative informed McCann, 

however, that these restrictions would not prevent McCann from working as “a 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 58 of 76 PageID: 6946
59

radiologist.” (Id.) The representative also notified McCann that his file was under 

review with the Quality Control Unit, and that the Company would send McCann formal 

written notice of its final decision. (Id.) 

2. Written Notice

Provident Life notified McCann that the Company terminated his benefits under 

the Policy via letter dated December 23, 2009 (“12-23-09 Termination Letter”). 

(BATES-1885–89.) According to the 12-23-09 Termination Letter, the Company issued 

a final benefit check of $7,020. (BATES-1886.) The 12-23-09 Termination Letter also 

explained, inter alia, the following: (1) the Company’s decision and supporting 

information; (2) relevant provisions of the Policy related to the Company’s decision; and 

(3) next steps available to McCann. (BATES-1885 89.) The 12-23-09 Termination 

Letter also explained that the 4-3-08 Dr. Coselli Letter, and the medical opinion of Dr. 

Parisi, supported termination of McCann’s benefits. (BATES-1886.) See also supra Sec. 

I.J (describing Dr. Parisi’s review of McCann’s medical file). With respect to McCann’s 

work restrictions and eligibility for Residual Disability, the letter stated the following: 

It is our view that you should be able to work up to 50 hours per week in 

your occupation. Our vocational consultant concluded that the majority of 

your practice was diagnostic radiology which involves sitting at a computer 

to read films. Our consultant noted that “[i]t would appear reasonable that 

the insured could work in a practice in which he can work a consistent shift 

and not take [on]-call [hours.]” Although you indicated that you previously 

worked 60 hours per week, your ability to work 50 hours per week would 

not be expected to cause a reduction of your monthly income of more than 

20% as required by the terms of Residual Disability. As such, you are not 

Residually Disabled in accordance with the policy terms. 

(BATES-1887–88.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 59 of 76 PageID: 6947
60

The conclusion of the 12-23-09 Termination Letter requested that McCann submit 

any additional medical information in support of his application for disability benefits 

and stated that McCann had 180 days to file an appeal with the Company. (BATES1888–89.)

3. Subsequent Medical Opinions 

McCann informed a Provident Life representative that he disagreed with the 

decision stated in the 12-23-09 Termination Letter via telephone call on January 14, 

2010. (BATES-1896.) He visited one new provider, Dr. Chandra Madala, a boardcertified cardiologist, after receiving the 12-23-09 Termination Letter. (BATES-2181.) 

Dr. Madala addressed a letter to McCann dated June 14, 2010 (“6-14-10 Dr. Madala 

Letter”), which stated as follows:

Your past medical history is significant for an ascending aortic aneurysm, 

sleep apnea and hypertension. Concerning your sleep apnea you report 

continued problems sleeping with significant fatigue during the day. Your 

hypertension appears better controlled since becoming disabled in March 

2008 .... As you are aware, aneurysms typically progressively increase in 

size over time .... I have reviewed and agree with Dr. Coselli’s letter to 

Holzer .... that you are fully and permanently disabled. In conclusion, my 

recommendation is to continue medical management of your condition with 

blood pressure control and lifestyle modification. Of particular importance 

is to avoid stress ....

(Id.) 

Dr. Linder, at McCann’s request, drafted a letter dated June 14, 2010 (“6-14-10 

Dr. Linder Letter”), addressing McCann’s OSA. (BATES-2176.) The 6-14-10 Dr. 

Linder Letter stated that McCann’s diagnosis of OSA exacerbated “his hypertension 

which is a contributing risk factor for possible rupture ... [of] his aneurysm.” (Id.) Dr. 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 60 of 76 PageID: 6948
61

Linder further stated that “[t]reatment with CPAP certainly helps but does not alleviate 

the risk factor of contributing to [McCann’s] hypertension.” (Id.)

N. The Appeal

McCann elected to appeal from Provident Life’s decision to terminate Total 

Disability benefits, and retained counsel to assist him in the internal appeal process with 

the Company. (BATES-2019–35.) Counsel for McCann authored an appeal letter and 

supporting exhibits dated June 21, 2010. (Id.) The exhibits included, inter alia, the 6-14-

10 Dr. Madala Letter and 6-14-10 Dr. Linder Letter. (BATES-2010.) The appeal argued, 

inter alia, that McCann’s occupation under the Policy was limited to interventional 

radiology. (BATES-2023.) 

1. Records Request 

Provident Life requested medical records related to McCann’s care from Dr. 

Madala, Dr. Lombardi, and Dr. Linder via letters dated June 28, 2010. (BATES-2265–

66; BATES-2268–69; BATES-2271–72.) Dr. Lombardi responded via facsimile that 

same day, and provided the treatment notes from McCann’s evaluation on October 22, 

2009. (BATES-2283–87.) Dr. Madala responded via facsimile dated June 30, 2010, 

which included her treatment notes from McCann’s cardiology consultation on June 14, 

2010, and her letter dated that same day. (BATES-2289–95.) Dr. Linder responded via 

facsimile dated July 16, 2010, which included the results of McCann’s sleep studies. 

(BATES-2337–53.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 61 of 76 PageID: 6949
62

2. Vocational Review: Meeting with Dr. Long 

A Provident Life representative, Glen Flagler, met with Dr. Long at Holzer on 

August 3, 2010 to discuss McCann’s pre-disability occupation. (BATES-2405–12.) 

Counsel for Holzer also attended that meeting. (BATES-2406.) Flagler issued a copy of 

the 6-8-08 Job Description Form and the 9-9-09 Vocational Report. See supra Secs. I.C.4

(describing 6-8-08 Job Description Form); I.E.9 (describing the 9-9-09 Vocational 

Report). Neither Dr. Long nor counsel disputed the validity of those documents. (Id.) 

Flagler also asked Dr. Long to describe McCann’s occupational duties, and described Dr. 

Long’s response as follows:

When asked if [McCann] was hired as an interventional radiologist or a 

diagnostic radiologist[,] Dr. Long responded, “Both.” He explained that the 

three interventional radiologists, of which he is one, “Do both things” (i.e., 

they perform interventional radiology and diagnostic radiology duties). He 

explained that there are nine radiologists at Holzer Clinic who perform 

diagnostic radiology, but only three of them also perform interventional 

radiology. He stated that the insured would not have been hired by Holzer 

... if he did not perform some interventional radiology. 

(BATES-2406.) 

Dr. Long also explained that “most interventional radiologist[s] also perform 

diagnostic work, which makes them more versatile.” (BATES-2409.) When asked about 

stress associated with diagnostic radiology, as compared to interventional radiology, Dr. 

Long responded that he “‘personally [did] not find one any more stressful than the 

other[.]’” (BATES-2410.)

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 62 of 76 PageID: 6950
63

3. Medical Review 

Provident Life initiated a medical review of the appeal in August of 2010. 

(BATES-2438.) The Company submitted McCann’s claim file to Latisha Toney on 

August 16, 2010. (BATES-2438–43.) As a clinical resource specialist for the Company, 

Toney reviewed McCann’s claim file de novo. (BATES-2439.) Toney drafted a clinical 

review report, which summarized McCann’s medical history and opined as follows: 

The file documentation reflects that the conditions identified as preventing 

function for ... McCann is that of his aortic aneurysm, OSA and 

[hypertension.] All of the conditions taken alone or in aggregate are not 

felt to support the [risk and limitations] identifying him as totally and 

permanently disabled. This is based upon the fact that the aneurysm is 

asymptomatic, its small in size and the limited amount of growth that has 

been noted up to August 2009 ... and ... McCann being told that for lesions 

of that size disability was not typically recommended. Dr. Coselli actually 

recommended that he might try an[other] area of radiology due to ... 

McCann’s complaints of being too stressed by interventional radiology .... 

McCann is noted to be hypertensive but a 24 BP monitoring did not 

identify any significant concerns ... It appears that his BP is adequately 

managed. In regards to his OSA ... McCann has been using CPAP and the 

most recent sleep study indicated a slight improvement in this condition .... 

McCann has two other physician’s [sic] agreeing that he is totally and 

permanently disabled but the basis for this assessment is not supported by 

the currently available information[.] The file will be forwarded for 

doctoral level review with a request for contact with Dr. Coselli for 

additional information/clarification ....

(BATES-2442.)

Dr. Paul W. Sweeney, a board-certified internal medicine physician with a 

subspecialty in cardiology, reviewed McCann’s claim file on September 10, 2010. 

(BATES-2454–60.) Dr. Sweeney also left messages for Dr. Coselli on two different 

occasions, however, Dr. Coselli did not return his telephone call. (BATES-2457.) 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 63 of 76 PageID: 6951
64

Dr. Sweeney provided a thorough summary of McCann’s medical history. 

(BATES-2457–58.) With respect to Dr. Coselli’s care, Dr. Sweeney stated as follows:

Serial CT scans demonstrated no appreciable growth of ... McCann’s 

aneurysm over the next 18 months[.] Dr. Coselli’s office record dated 

August 14, 2009 documented no ongoing symptoms and no appreciable 

aneurysm growth[.] Dr. Coselli’s office note clearly indicates that there is 

no reason to continue disability and Dr. Coselli suggested a return to work. 

(BATES-2458.) Dr. Sweeney stated the following as to McCann’s disability status:

The medical record clearly documents an asymptomatic mildly dilated 

ascending aorta[.] Initial evaluation demonstrated no evidence of 

dissection or significant aortic valve disease .... It is appropriate to continue 

aggressive efforts at blood pressure control, lipid management, and weight 

reduction as part of a healthy lifestyle that will assist in prevention of future 

aneurysm growth[.] As Dr. Coselli’s office records from August 10, 2009, 

and September 9, 2009 indicate, there is no longer any valid rationale to 

continue restrictions or limitations, due to his stable ascending aortic 

aneurysm, that would prevent ... McCann from resuming on a full-time 

basis his previous occupation as an interventional and diagnostic 

radiologist. 

(Id.)

Dr. Sweeney reviewed the results of McCann’s CT scans, which studied the size 

of the aortic aneurysm. (BATES-2459.) He offered the following conclusion with 

respect to the varying measurements reported by those studies:

... [S]equential studies demonstrate no significant change in the size of the 

ascending aorta. The variability in measurements is likely related to 

difference in technique and to different physician readers. There is no trend 

indicating enlargement of a mildly dilated ascending aorta.

(Id.)

Dr. Sweeney also found that McCann’s medical condition did not impose any jobrelated restrictions and limitations. (Id.) Dr. Sweeney elaborated as follows:

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 64 of 76 PageID: 6952
65

Specifically[,] there are no restrictions on standing, sitting or walking .... 

McCann can occasionally climb and operate heavy machinery. He can 

frequently twist and reach above shoulder level. He can continuously lift 

up to 10 pounds, frequently 11–20 pounds, and occasionally lift 21–100 

pounds.

(Id.) 

Dr. Sweeney also noted that the 7-15-08 Dr. Linder APS did not identify any jobrelated restriction or limitations with respect to McCann’s OSA. Dr. Sweeney sent a 

letter dated September 7, 2010 to Dr. Coselli, which stated, in relevant part, as follows:

Your office notes indicated that after nearly two years of stability, disability 

was no longer necessary and that ... McCann could return to his occupation 

as a radiologist. As these opinions are conflicting, could you please clarify 

your opinion regarding the impact of ... McCann’s ascending aortic 

aneurysm on his functional capacity .... I realize that you would prefer to 

leave this issue to ... McCann’s local physicians, but they are deferring to 

your expertise. 

(BATES-2462.)23 

4. Vocational Rehabilitation Consultant Review 

A Provident Life vocational rehabilitation consultant, Richard Byard, reviewed 

McCann’s claim file on September 13, 2010. (BATES-2464–65.) Byard, upon 

reviewing the 6-8-08 Job Description Form, 11-13-08 Gaughan Vocational Report, and 

the occupational components of McCann’s appeal letter, concluded as follows:

 

23 Dr. Coselli responded to Dr. Sweeney’s request via letter dated September 20, 2010 (“9-20-10 

Dr. Coselli Letter”). (BATES-2492.) That letter was received by Provident Life a few hours 

after it issued its final determination on September 20, 2010. (Dkt. 93-2 at 33–34.) The parties 

dispute the validity and admissibility of the 9-20-10 Dr. Coselli Letter. (Dkt. 93-2 at 8 

(describing McCann’s motion to strike the 9-20-10 Dr. Coselli Letter).) The Court does not find 

the 9-20-10 Dr. Coselli Letter dispositive to its ruling, and therefore need not address it in this 

Memorandum Opinion. 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 65 of 76 PageID: 6953
66

Based on the available information, it is reasonable to conclude that the 

physical demands of the insured’s own occupation would not exceed his 

level of work capacity as described in the stated [restrictions and 

limitations.] As noted in Dr. Sweeney’s review of [9-1-10], the insured has 

no restrictions on standing, sitting, or walking and he can occasionally lift 

up to the 21–100 lb range. The insured can occasionally climb and operate 

heavy equipment and he can frequently twist and reach above shoulder 

level.

Given the [restrictions and limitations] as described in Dr. Sweeney’s 

review, the insured would be able to perform both the diagnostic and the 

interventional components of his Radiology practice.

(BATES-2465.)

5. Provident Life’s Final Determination on Appeal

Provident Life denied McCann’s appeal (“Final Determination”) via letter dated 

September 20, 2010 (“9-20-10 Final Determination Letter”), which was addressed to 

counsel. (BATES-2470–78.) The 9-20-10 Final Determination Letter stated that the 

Company “concluded that ... McCann [was] able to perform the duties of his occupation” 

and therefore did not meet the Policy definition of disability. (BATES-2471.) With 

respect to medical review on appeal, the 9-20-10 Final Determination Letter explained 

that a board-certified physician reviewed McCann’s medical file, and concluded that 

McCann had “no restrictions on standing, sitting or walking,” and found that McCann 

could “occasionally climb and operate heavy machinery ... [and] frequently twist and 

reach above shoulder level.” (BATES-2475.) The 9-20-10 Final Determination Letter 

stated the following with respect to vocational review on appeal:

As you know, despite the fact that ... McCann was hired by and listed by 

Holzer Clinic as an Interventional Radiologist, his CPT codes clearly 

reflect that, in the years prior to disability ... McCann was practicing as a 

Diagnostic Radiologist. However, to ensure that our understanding of his 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 66 of 76 PageID: 6954
67

occupational duties was correct, we met with Dr[.] Phillip Long of the 

Holzer Clinic, and shared with him the results of the CPT code review[.] 

He did not disagree with the finding that ... McCann did work primarily as 

a Diagnostic Radiologist, according to the CPT codes from Holzer Clinic 

... Dr[.] Long also indicated that he was not aware of any medical problems 

limiting your client in the performance of his duties, prior to his claim for 

disability. 

....

An additional Vocational assessment was requested, in light of the results 

of the No Deference Medical Review. This assessment concluded that ... 

McCann is capable of performing both the diagnostic and intervention 

components of his occupation.

(BATES-2474–75.) 

The 9-20-10 Final Determination Letter further stated that, based upon the medical 

and vocational reviews on appeal, the Company determined as follows:

Based on our appellate review, the information in your client’s claim file 

supports that he is able to perform the duties of his own occupation and the 

decision to deny benefits on his claim is appropriate, in light of the terms of 

the policy and the facts of the claim.

...

[T]he CPT codes received from the Holzer Clinic confirm that ... McCann 

was primarily a Diagnostic Radiologist. This CPT review was conducted in 

September of 2009, after the claim had been accepted by the Company 

(under the assumption that ... McCann, was, in fact, an Interventional 

Radiologist).

....

However, the No Deference and Vocational reviews recently conducted 

indicate that ... McCann could perform both the diagnostic and 

interventional components of his occupation. Furthermore, even if we gave 

... McCann the benefit of the doubt and accepted that he could not perform 

his interventional duties, these duties only accounted for 11–18% of his 

charges, and therefore, it would not appear that he would suffer the required 

20% loss of income (in order to be eligible for Residual Disability Benefits) 

if he were forced to give up this aspect of his occupation.

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 67 of 76 PageID: 6955
68

Additionally, Dr. Long has confirmed that Valsalva maneuvers were not 

required in the performance of ... McCann’s duties. Additionally, Dr. 

Long since clarified that the information he originally submitted in [the 6-

8-08 Job Description Form] was an estimate only, and was not based upon 

any objective documentation (such as CPT codes).

It should also be noted that [Provident Life] never classified ... McCann as 

totally and permanently disabled. His claim was accepted (based upon the 

misunderstanding regarding his occupation), but was never classified as 

totally and permanently disabled, as you suggest. This is supported by the 

fact that the claim evaluation continued, even after the claim was accepted 

.... The evaluation of a disability claim is an ongoing process and continues 

until such a determination is made that an insured is totally and 

permanently disabled[.] This Company never determined that this was the 

case with ... McCann[.]

....

You also comment on [Provident Life’s] failure to obtain blood pressure 

readings while ... McCann is performing Interventional Radiology .... As 

you know ,... McCann has not performed any radiological duties since 

March of 2008[.] Therefore, it would not be possible to obtain such 

readings ....

(BATES-2475–77.) 

The conclusion of the 9-20-10 Final Determination Letter informed McCann of his 

“right to bring suit a civil suit under section 502(a)” of ERISA. (BATES-2478.) This 

action followed. 

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A. Cross Motions for Summary Judgment 

The standard for a motion for summary judgment is well-settled and will be 

briefly summarized here. Rule 56 provides that summary judgment is proper if there is 

no genuine issue as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter 

of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A court, in making that determination, must view the record 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 68 of 76 PageID: 6956
69

in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draw all inferences in that party’s 

favor. United States ex rel. Kosenske v. Carlisle HMA, Inc., 554 F.3d 88, 94 (3d Cir. 

2009).

The summary judgment standard is not affected when the parties file cross 

motions for summary judgment. Appelmans v. City of Phila., 826 F.2d 214, 216 (3d Cir. 

1987). “A party’s concessions made for purposes of its own summary judgment motion 

do not carry over into the court’s consideration of the opposing party’s motion.” 

Lamanna v. Special Agents Mut. Benefits Ass’n, 546 F.Supp.2d 261, 267 (W.D. Pa. 

2008). If review of cross motions for summary judgment reveals no genuine issues of 

material fact, then judgment will be entered “in favor of the party deserving judgment in 

light of the law and undisputed facts.” Iberia Foods Corp. v. Romeo, 150 F.3d 298, 302 

(3d Cir. 1998).

B. De Novo Standard of Review

A court must review a denial of ERISA plan benefits under a de novo standard of 

review “unless the benefit plan gives the administrator or fiduciary discretionary 

authority to determine eligibility for benefits or to construe the terms of the plan.” 

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 115 (1989). A court’s role under 

de novo review “is to determine whether the administrator ... made a correct decision.” 

Viera v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 642 F.3d 407, 413 (3d Cir. 2011) (internal citation and 

quotation omitted). That determination hinges upon: (1) “whether the administrator 

properly interpreted the plan”; and (2) “whether the insured was entitled to benefits under 

the plan.” Id. at 414 (internal citation and quotation omitted). “The administrator’s 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 69 of 76 PageID: 6957
70

decision is accorded no deference or presumption of correctness.” Id. at 413–14 (internal 

citation and quotation omitted). 

DISCUSSION

III. LEGAL STANDARD APPLIED HERE

Provident Life argues that “McCann cannot meet his burden of demonstrating that 

he is entitled to continued benefits or that the [Final Determination] was incorrect.” (Dkt. 

93-2 at 10.) McCann disagrees, contending that he is entitled to Total Disability benefits 

or, in the alternative, that he is entitled to Residual Disability benefits under the Policy. 

(See, e.g., dkt. 94-7 at 12, 45–49.) McCann raises several alleged points of error related 

to the Final Determination, which the Court considers below. 

A. Medical Review in Support of Final Determination 

The Court has thoroughly reviewed the administrative record and considered it in 

its entirety. The Court now concludes that the Final Determination was correct, because 

Provident Life properly interpreted and applied the terms of the Plan, discussed supra

Sec. I.A, to McCann’s medical condition, discussed supra Secs. I.B–N. 

Provident Life contends that McCann “fail[ed] to submit objective, diagnostic test 

results or other documentation from any physician to support that he was unable to 

perform the substantial and material duties of his regular occupation which included both 

diagnostic and interventional duties,” as required under the Policy. (Dkt. 93-2 at 10–11.) 

See also supra Sec. I.A.1 (describing that, in order to qualify for Total Disability, a 

claimant must demonstrate “the inability to perform substantial and material job duties”). 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 70 of 76 PageID: 6958
71

Provident Life also discredits the medical opinions stated in the 6-14-10 Dr. 

Madala Letter and 6-14-10 Dr. Lombardi Letter, on the ground that “[b]oth physicians 

referenced and relied upon the earlier opinion of Dr. Coselli” that McCann qualified for 

disability. (Dkt. 93-2 at 8.) Provident Life also points out that there is no indication that 

either physician reviewed the notes related to the 8-10-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment, 

wherein Dr. Coselli reversed his opinion that McCann qualified for disability under the 

Policy. (Dkt. 93-2 at 9.) 

The Court finds that Provident Life terminated McCann’s Total Disability benefit 

payments, at least in part because McCann failed to provide objective evidence of jobrelated restrictions and limitations. Indeed, McCann’s physician, Dr. Coselli, disclaimed 

his view that McCann qualified for disability, after McCann’s cardiac condition remained 

stable for nearly two years. The supplemental clinical opinions offered by McCann –

notably the 6-14-10 Dr. Madala Letter and 6-14-10 Dr. Lombardi Letter – ignore Dr. 

Coselli’s most recent clinical opinion that McCann did not qualify for Total Disability 

under the Terms of the Policy. See supra Sec. I.E.10 (“We discussed the terminology of 

permanent and total disability and we agreed to disagree regarding the sequencing of 

events. The fact remains that over the past two years following him, his aorta has been 

essentially stable[.] Surgery is not indicated at this time – the size does not indicate 

intervention and although there is a 30% chance that he will need surgery, it may not be 

for 5, 10 or 20 years.”). Accordingly, the Court does not find that Provident Life 

incorrectly administered its medical review. See supra Sec. I.E.10 (describing Dr. 

Coselli’s medical opinion, as stated during the 8-10-09 Dr. Coselli Appointment). See 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 71 of 76 PageID: 6959
72

also Leipzig v. AIG Life Ins. Co., 362 F.3d 406, 409 (7th Cir. 2004) (“Many persons with 

serious heart conditions work at stressful jobs for years without ill effects. Think of 

President Eisenhower, Vice President Cheney, and Associate Justice Stevens.”); Zurawel 

v. Long Term Disability Income Plan for Choices Eligible Emps. of Johnson & Johnson, 

No. 07-5973, 2010 WL 3862543 at *10 (D.N.J. Sept. 27, 2010) (“Ultimately, Plaintiff 

bears the burden of proof and must present required medical information to the Plan in 

order for the Plan ... to find that he is disabled.” (internal citation omitted)).

B. Occupational Classification

Provident Life argues that the “CPT codes were representative of all of the work 

that Dr. McCann performed during the three years preceding the onset of his claim of 

total disability,” and are therefore dispositive under the Policy. (Dkt. 93-2 at 6.) 

According to Provident Life, McCann did not qualify for Total Disability, because the 

diagnostic duties associated with his occupation “accounted for 91% of the procedures he 

performed each week” during the three and a half year period preceding his application 

for disability leave. (Id. at 11.) 

McCann contends that he is an interventional radiologist because he “underwent 

significant specialized training, including the completion of a surgical internship ....” 

(Dkt. 94-7 at 14.) According to McCann, the 6-8-08 Job Description Form, discussed 

supra Sec. I.C.4, confirms that a significant portion of his former practice was exclusively 

dedicated to interventional radiology. (Id. at 37.) McCann also challenges the validity of 

the 9-9-09 Vocational Report, on the ground its underlying data does not “account for the 

time dedicated to each type of work.” 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 72 of 76 PageID: 6960
73

McCann’s arguments with respect to his occupational status under the Policy are 

misguided and unsupported by countervailing occupational review. Provident Life 

explained to McCann, via the Final Determination Letter, that Dr. Long later informed 

the Company that the statements in the 6-8-08 Job Description Form were “an estimate 

only, and [were] not based upon any objective documentation (such as CPT codes).” See

supra Sec. I.C.4. McCann also fails to explain how the length of interventional 

diagnostic procedures impacts the data considered and collated by the Company in the 9-

4-09 Vocational Analysis Charts, discussed supra Sec. I.E.9. Accordingly, the Court 

does not find that the Final Determination with respect to McCann’s occupation, as 

defined under the Policy, was incorrect. Viera, 642 F.3d at 413; Mitchell v. Eastman 

Kodak Co., 113 F.3d 433, 439 (3d Cir. 2015) (“a claimant bears the burden of 

demonstrating that he qualifies for benefits”) (abrogated on other grounds). See also

supra Sec. I.A (stating the definition of occupation under the Policy is “the occupation (or 

occupations, if more than one) in which [the participant is] regularly engaged at the time” 

the disability occurs).

C. Reversal of Opinion: Reservation of Rights 

Provident Life contends that the Company issued its Final Determination at least 

in part because McCann’s chosen physician, Dr. Coselli, determined that he was no 

longer disabled. (Dkt. 93-2 at 6.) See also supra Sec. I.E.10. Provident Life also 

contends that it classified McCann as totally disabled, but eligibility determinations 

continue after the Company removes a Reservation of Rights. (Dkt. 93-2 at 20 (“While 

Provident Life did initially approve disability benefits for Dr. McCann, it continued to 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 73 of 76 PageID: 6961
74

investigate his eligibility for disability benefits. At no point did Provident Life classify 

Dr. McCann as ‘permanently’ disabled; rather, Provident Life continued to exercise its 

right to require updated medical records supporting Dr. McCann’s disability.”).) 

McCann, on the other hand, contends that the Company impermissibly reversed its initial 

determination that he permanently qualified for Total Disability. (Dkt. 94-7 at 11 (“Soon 

after removing the reservation of rights, [Provident Life’s] handling of Plaintiff’s claims 

shifted dramatically, driven by an objective as clear as it was improper ....”).)

The Court does not find that Provident Life impermissibly reversed its prior 

determinations related to McCann’s claim file. As the Court’s lengthy factual review of 

the administrative record indicates, Provident Life continued to review McCann’s claim 

even after the Company lifted the Reservation of Rights. That review considered 

voluminous medical documents demonstrating developments in McCann’s medical 

conditions, as defined under the Policy. See supra Sec. I. Accordingly, the Court does 

not find that the Final Determination was incorrect. Abnathya v. Hoffman LaRoche, Inc.,

2 F.3d 40 (3d Cir. 1993); Miller v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 632 F.3d 837, 849 (3d Cir. 2011) 

(recognizing that “initial payment of ... benefits does not operate as an estoppel such that 

[a plan administrator] can never terminate benefits”). 

D. Residual Disability Benefits 

McCann urges the Court – in the event that it finds McCann is not entitled to Total 

Disability benefits – to find that McCann is entitled to Residual Disability benefits. (Dkt. 

94-7 at 45–46; see also dkt. 109; dkt. 111.) McCann argues, in support thereof, that the 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 74 of 76 PageID: 6962
75

Policy “does not require McCann to be working in order to be eligible for” Residual 

Disability benefits. (Dkt. 109 at 10.) 

Provident Life argues that “McCann did not establish that he suffered a loss of 

pre-disability income of at least 20%, which is necessary to be eligible for residual 

disability benefits under the Policy.” (Dkt. 93-2 at 7.) Thus, according to Provident Life, 

McCann “is not eligible for residual disability benefits because he has not returned to 

work and he has not established the requisite loss of monthly income as required by the 

Policy.” (Dkt. 99 at 6.) See also supra Sec. I.A.3. Finally, Provident Life argues that 

McCann’s demand for Residual Disability benefits is untimely, because McCann did not 

claim Residual Disability benefits with the Company after he stopped working entirely.24 

The Court agrees with Provident Life, and finds that McCann’s demand for 

Residual Disability benefits is untimely as filed after Provident Life issued its Final 

Determination. As discussed at length supra Sec. I.C.4, McCann was familiar with the 

administrative requirements to submit a Residual Disability claim with the Company. 

Here, the burden was on McCann to submit a claim for Residual Disability benefits 

before the issuance of the Final Determination. The Court further finds that considering 

McCann’s disability benefit claim here – on first instance – would thwart ERISA’s 

underlying objective to promote the exhaustion of administrative remedies before 

 

24 The Company paid Residual Disability benefits for the period that McCann worked 

reduced work hours at Holzer. (Dkt. 110 at 11–12 (displaying table of Residual 

Disability benefits paid to McCann for the period he worked reduced hours from April 1, 

2007 to March 10, 2008).) See also supra Secs. I.C.I; I.E. McCann, however, did not 

claim Residual Disability benefits after he stopped working entirely on March 7, 2008. 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 75 of 76 PageID: 6963
76

institution of an action in federal court. Accordingly, the Court will not award Residual 

Disability benefits to McCann. Abnathya, 2 F.3d at 46 (evidence submitted after final 

claim determination considered untimely) (abrogated on other grounds); Henshaw v. 

Roofers Local No. 4 Pension Fund, No. 04-6106, 2006 WL 2715138, at *6 (D.N.J. Sept. 

22, 2006) (“A federal court will entertain ERISA claims brought under 29 U.S.C. §

1132(a) only if the claimant has exhausted all administrative remedies before bringing the 

case in a district court.”).

CONCLUSION

The Court must determine whether the Final Determination of Provident Life was 

correct in light of the terms of the Policy and detailed factual analysis discussed supra

Sec. I. The Court, having reviewed the Final Determination de novo, finds that it was 

correct, and supported by the Policy and the facts stated in the administrative record. 

The Court will, for good cause appearing, enter a separate Order and Judgment, 

granting the motion for summary judgment filed by Provident Life, denying the cross 

motion for summary judgment filed by McCann, and entering judgment on Count One of 

the Complaint in favor of Provident Life and against McCann. 

 s/ Mary L. Cooper .

MARY L. COOPER

United States District Judge

Dated: March 23, 2016 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MLC-TJB Document 112 Filed 03/23/16 Page 76 of 76 PageID: 6964