Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1116_h3cj.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  589 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 18–1116 
_________________ 

INTEL CORPORATION INVESTMENT POLICY 
COMMITTEE, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. 
CHRISTOPHER M. SULYMA 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

[February 26, 2020]

 JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The  Employee  Retirement  Income  Security  Act  of  1974
(ERISA)  requires  plaintiffs  with  “actual  knowledge”  of  an
alleged  fiduciary  breach  to  file  suit  within  three  years  of 
gaining that knowledge rather than within the 6-year pe-
riod  that  would  otherwise  apply.  §413(a)(2)(A),  88  Stat.
889, as amended, 29 U. S. C. §1113.  The question here is 
whether  a  plaintiff  necessarily  has  “actual  knowledge”  of
the  information  contained  in  disclosures  that  he  receives 
but does not read or cannot recall reading.  We hold that he 
does not and therefore affirm. 

I 
A 

Retirement plans governed by ERISA must have at least 
one  named  fiduciary,  §1102(a)(1),  who  must  manage  the 
plan  prudently  and  solely  in  the  interests  of  participants 
and  their  beneficiaries, §1104(a).   Fiduciaries  who  breach 
these duties are personally liable to the plan for any result-
ing  losses.  §1109(a).  ERISA  authorizes  participants  and