Case Name: Hugo SLUIMER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VERITY, INC., a corporation; The Verity Inc. Change in Control and Severance Benefit Plan, Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-05-20
Citations: 379 F. App'x 685
Docket Number: No. 09-15128
Parties: Hugo SLUIMER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VERITY, INC., a corporation; The Verity Inc. Change in Control and Severance Benefit Plan, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: Before: HUG, RYMER and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 379
Pages: 685–686

Head Matter:
Hugo SLUIMER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VERITY, INC., a corporation; The Verity Inc. Change in Control and Severance Benefit Plan, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 09-15128.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted May 12, 2010.
Filed May 20, 2010.
Keith Ehrman, Cliff Palefsky, McGuinn, Hillsman & Palefsky, William Reilly, Esquire, Joseph M. Rimac, Jr., Esquire, Kevin Gill, Rimac Martin, P.C., San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Gregory Doll, Doll Amir Eley LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellants.
Before: HUG, RYMER and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
We have affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to Hugo Sluimer in a separate published order. Sluimer v. Verity, No. 09-15128, slip. op. (9th Cir. May 13, 2010). Verity raises the additional argument on appeal that the district court "exceeded its powers by rewriting" Verity's release "to accommodate Sluimer's lawsuits." We disagree. The district court simply required Verity to make its standard release consistent with the district court's award of attorney's fees, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1), and its proper interpretation of the Plan and Sluimer's individually negotiated Participation Notice.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.