Case Name: Cynthia BLUM, Plaintiff-Appellant v. SPECTRUM RESTAURANT GROUP-EMPLOYEES GROUP LIFE AND SUPPLEMENTAL LIFE PLAN; et al, Defendants Spectrum Restaurant Group-Employees Group Life and Supplemental Life Plan; Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.; Custom Benefit Consultants, Inc., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-08-08
Citations: 140 F. App'x 556
Docket Number: No. 03-40748
Parties: Cynthia BLUM, Plaintiff-Appellant v. SPECTRUM RESTAURANT GROUP-EMPLOYEES GROUP LIFE AND SUPPLEMENTAL LIFE PLAN; et al, Defendants Spectrum Restaurant Group—Employees Group Life and Supplemental Life Plan; Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.; Custom Benefit Consultants, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 140
Pages: 556–557

Head Matter:
Cynthia BLUM, Plaintiff-Appellant v. SPECTRUM RESTAURANT GROUP-EMPLOYEES GROUP LIFE AND SUPPLEMENTAL LIFE PLAN; et al, Defendants Spectrum Restaurant Group—Employees Group Life and Supplemental Life Plan; Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.; Custom Benefit Consultants, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-40748.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 8, 2005.
Michael Prospero Maslanka, Grady Michael Gruber, Hilaree A. Casada, Godwin Gruber, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Melissa M. Goodman, Haynes & Boone, Scott Masur McElhaney, Jackson Walker, Dallas, TX, Barry A. Chasnoff, Jo Beth Eubanks, Thomas E. Sanders, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
After reviewing the record and considering argument of counsel and briefs of the parties we are satisfied the district court committed no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons stated in its Memorandum Opinion and Order of April 14, 2003 and April 28, 2003.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.