Case Name: Gerard J. REIMERING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION and the California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau; California State Automobile Association; California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-10
Citations: 34 F. App'x 380
Docket Number: No. 01-15505; D.C. No. CV-99-04054-THE(JL)
Parties: Gerard J. REIMERING, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. THE RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION and the California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau; California State Automobile Association; California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 34
Pages: 380–381

Head Matter:
Gerard J. REIMERING, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. THE RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION and the California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau; California State Automobile Association; California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 01-15505. D.C. No. CV-99-04054-THE(JL).
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 12, 2002.
Decided May 10, 2002.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, B. FLETCHER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The Early Retirement Incentives Program was not under serious consideration until after Reimering's retirement. Reimering never made a specific inquiry about a possible plan enhancement, and defendants therefore had no duty to inform him of sporadic discussions of the subject. See Bins v. Exxon Co. U.S.A., 220 F.3d 1042, 1048-49 (9th Cir.2000).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.