Case Name: Tuyet NGUYEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANIES AND AFFILIATES EMPLOYEE HEALTH CARE PLAN, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-24
Citations: 122 F. App'x 262
Docket Number: No. 03-4071
Parties: Tuyet NGUYEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANIES AND AFFILIATES EMPLOYEE HEALTH CARE PLAN, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before SILER, BATCHELDER and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 122
Pages: 262–262

Head Matter:
Tuyet NGUYEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANIES AND AFFILIATES EMPLOYEE HEALTH CARE PLAN, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 03-4071.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Feb. 24, 2005.
Tony C. Merry, Janet L. Larkin, Volkema, Thomas, Miller, Burkett, Scott & Merry, Columbus, OH, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Randolph Carson Wiseman, James P. Schuck, Bricker & Eckler, Columbus, OH, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before SILER, BATCHELDER and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Tuyet Nguyen appeals from the district court's entry of judgment on the administrative record denying reinstatement of her long-term disability benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132. After carefully reviewing the record, the applicable law, the parties' briefs and counsels' arguments, we are convinced that the district court did not err in its conclusions. We do note that the district court applied the "treating physician rule" in this ERISA case pursuant our decision in Darland v. Fortis Benefits Ins. Co., 317 F.3d 516 (6th Cir.2003), which has since been overruled by the Supreme Court in Black & Decker Disability Plan v. Nord, 538 U.S. 822, 123 S.Ct. 1965, 155 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2003) ("treating physician rule" inapplicable in the ERISA context). But even using that rule, which worked to Nguyen's advantage because it favored the opinion of the claimant's treating physician in an ERISA case, the district court found substantial evidence to contradict the opinion of Nguyen's treating physician. Because the issuance of a full opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose and would be duplicative, we AFFIRM the order denying benefits on the basis of the district court's well-reasoned opinion.