University of Southern California, et al. v. Allen L. Munro, et al.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) provides that a “civil action may be brought . . . by a participant” in an ERISA plan for breach of fiduciary duty. ERISA § 502(a)(2), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2). If liability is established in that action, the fiduciary is “personally liable to make good to such plan any losses to the plan,” ERISA § 409(a), 29 U.S.C. § 1109(a), which, like all plan assets, are held in trust for the benefit of the plan’s participants. Respondents are participants in two ERISA plans sponsored by petitioner University of Southern California; they signed arbitration agreements in which they agreed to arbitrate “all claims . . . that [they] may have against” the University. Respondents thereafter filed ERISA breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims against the University. Although this Court has held that “where [a] contract contains an arbitration clause, there is a presumption of arbitrability,” AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc’ns Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643, 650 (1986), the Ninth Circuit reversed this presumption and held that respondents’ claims “fall[ ] outside the scope of the [arbitration] agreements” because respondents’ “claims are brought on behalf of the Plans,” not “on their own behalf,” and therefore are not “claims” that respondents “have” against the University. The question presented is: Whether an agreement to arbitrate “all claims” that an ERISA plan participant “may have” against a plan fiduciary encompasses a breach-of-fiduciaryduty claim under ERISA § 502(a)(2).