Termination of a defined-benefit plan; ERISA; Whether 29 USC § 1342(c) requires a judicial adjudication to terminate a pension benefit plan; Jones & Laughlin Hourly Pension Plan v. LTV Corp. (2d Cir.); In re UAL Corp. (7th Cir.); Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Alloytek, Inc.; Allied Pilots Ass’n v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. (DC Cir.); In re Syntex Fabrics, Inc. Pension Plan (3d Cir.); Procedural due process; Leary v. Daeschner; Board of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth; Duncan v. Muzyn; Nachman Corp. v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp.; Matter of Defoe Shipbuilding Co.; § 1322(b)(3); Whether defendant-Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s (PBGC) decision to terminate the plan was arbitrary & capricious; Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Kentucky Bancshares, Inc. (Unpub. 6th Cir.); 5 USC § 706(2)(A); Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. LTV Corp.: National Ass’n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife; Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.; §§ 1342(a) & 1302(a)

[This appeal was from the ED-MI.] In an amended opinion (see e-Journal #73765 in the 9/3/20 edition for the original opinion), the court again joined other circuits and held that § 1342(c) of the ERISA does not require a judicial adjudication to terminate a pension-benefit plan. Rather, a plan may be terminated by an agreement between defendant-PBGC and the plan administrator. In the amended opinion, the court clarified its ruling that plaintiffs-retirees’ due-process claim failed where neither ERISA nor the Salaried Plan document gave them “a legitimate claim of entitlement to the entire amount of their vested, but unfunded, pension benefits.