Case Name: Idalee R. STOCKMAN-OKHOLM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-04-22
Citations: 33 F. App'x 362
Docket Number: No. 01-55282; D.C. No. CV-99-09438-JSL
Parties: Idalee R. STOCKMAN-OKHOLM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and REED, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 33
Pages: 362–363

Head Matter:
Idalee R. STOCKMAN-OKHOLM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 01-55282.
D.C. No. CV-99-09438-JSL.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 4, 2002.
Decided April 22, 2002.
Before FERNANDEZ and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and REED, District Judge.
The Honorable Edward C. Reed, Jr., Senior United States District Judge for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Appellant Idelee Stockman-Okholm ("Stockman-Okholm"), appeals the district court's judgment upholding the Plan Administrator's decision to deny disability benefits to Stockman-Okholm. Stock-man-Okholm also appeals the district court's dismissal of her state law bad faith claims, and the award of attorney fees to Appellee UNUM Life Insurance Company of America ("UNUM").
Stockman-Okholm raised the issue that UNUM operated under a conflict of interest for the first time in her reply brief. Accordingly, this issue is waived. Arpin v. Santa Clara Valley Tramp. Agc'y, 261 F.3d 912, 919 (9th Cir.2001). On this record, we cannot say that UNUM's decision was arbitrary or capricious. Stockman-Okholm's bad faith claims are preempted by the Employee Retirement Security Income Act of 1974 (ERISA). Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. Dedeaux, 481 U.S. 41, 57, 107 S.Ct. 1549, 95 L.Ed.2d 39 (1987); Kanne v. Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co., 867 F.2d 489, 493 (9th Cir.1988) (as amended).
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.
. UNUM has abandoned any claim for fees or costs. This issue is therefore moot.