Opinion ID: 779893
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Claims against AT&T

Text: 24 Bui alleges only one claim against AT&T, for breach of contract. AT&T's role in the facts underlying this case ended when Lucent became Duong's employer and assumed the ERISA plan. 28 Duong's illness occurred after Lucent spun off from AT&T. Thus, AT&T's only role was establishing the plan and selecting SOS. Such activities are purely administrative, and ERISA preempts suits based upon them. 29 If such claims were not preempted, plan administrators would be held to a multiplicity of state standards when they decide how to structure ERISA plans and select service providers for those plans. 30 That is precisely the situation Congress sought to avoid when it passed ERISA and prescribed the broad preemption clause. 31 The district court correctly held that ERISA preempts the claim against AT&T.