David Gasper v. EIDP, Inc. fka, E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Company, et al.

A domestic-relations order approved as a qualified domestic relations order (“QDRO”) is final and binding, and a plan administrator must treat the assigned benefit as fixed under that order. 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(3) (ERISA § 206(d)(3)). ERISA requires administrators to provide written notice of any adverse benefit deter­ mination, including “the specific reason or reasons” and “reference to the specific plan provisions on which the determination is based.” 29 U.S.C. § 1133 (ERISA § 503). Under the Chenery doctrine, a reviewing court may uphold an agency decision only on the grounds the agency itself invoked. SEC v. Chenery Corp., 318 U.S. 80 (1943). The Questions Presented Are:

1. Whether a reviewing court violates ERISA § 503 and the Chenery doctrine by affirming a benefit reduction based on post-hoc rationales and plan provi­ sions never identified by the administrator during the administrative process.

2. Whether a plan administrator may replace a vested, separate-interest QDRO benefit with an unauthorized spousal-annuity form—derived from ERISA § 205 (29 U.S.C. § 1055), absent from the Plan documents, and altering the state court’s division of property.