Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

The Capital Group Companies, Inc., et al. v. Cathy Pover

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 24-5298 · judgment July 30, 2026


55%
estimated cert probability
(petition-stage, structural)
95% interval 44%–65%
Rule 10: circuit split argued
Conference-stage estimate: 12%

About 13.3× the 4.1% base rate. The model weights this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, counsel who has won certiorari before, and a circuit split argued in the petition.

Question presented

Section 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) allows a plan participant to bring an action “for appropriate relief” under ERISA § 409. 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2). Section 409, in turn, provides that a plan fiduciary who breaches a duty is “liable to make good to such plan any losses” resulting from that breach. Id. § 1109(a). In Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Russell, 473 U.S. 134, 144 (1985), the Court held, in the context of defined-benefit plans (which promise fixed income), that “recovery for a violation of § 409” goes to “the plan as a whole,” so § 502(a)(2) authorizes relief only “for the plan itself.” In LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc., 552 U.S. 248, 256 (2008), the Court held, in the context of defined-contribution plans (which promise the value of individual accounts, which may fluctuate), that § 502(a)(2) authorizes “recovery for fiduciary breaches that impair the value of plan assets in a participant’s individual account.” Since LaRue, the courts of appeals have split on the scope of “appropriate relief” for defined-contribution-plan-participant plaintiffs. In the Fourth Circuit, those plaintiffs can seek monetary recovery to only their “individual retirement account[s].” Trauernicht v. Genworth Financial Inc., 169. F.4th 459, 468-69 (4th Cir. 2026) (Niemeyer, J.). But seven circuits, including the Ninth Circuit here, hold that § 502(a)(2) doesn’t “limit” plaintiffs “to recovering losses suffered only by their individual accounts.” App. 21a. The question presented is whether “appropriate relief” for a defined-contribution-plan participant under ERISA § 502(a)(2) includes monetary recovery to other participants’ individual retirement accounts.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Parker Andrew Rider-Longmaid
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

For respondent
Charles Henry Field
Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP

Case

Subject area
Economic Activity (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Oct 09 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 2, 2026.
  2. Oct 08 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 2, 2026 to December 2, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
  3. Oct 01 2026
    Response Requested. (Due November 2, 2026)
  4. Sep 23 2026
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2026.
  5. Sep 18 2026
    Supplemental brief of petitioners The Capital Group Companies, Inc., et al. filed.
  6. Sep 16 2026
    Waiver of right of respondent Cathy Pover to respond filed.
  7. Aug 19 2026
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 1, 2026)