A New Jersey federal district court held (in an unpublished opinion) that a former plan participant’s same-sex spouse who never enrolled in the benefit plan did not have standing to assert a claim alleging that his spouse’s employer failed to provide proper and timely notice of coverage under COBRA. The court reasoned that plaintiff lacked statutory standing because he could not plead that he was a participant or beneficiary of the plan as is required to sue for benefits under ERISA § 402(a)(1). The court also rejected plaintiff’s arguments that he had standing because his “spouse had intended to designate Plaintiff as a beneficiary,” and that he fell within an exception to the participant or beneficiary requirement that is made when the complained-of conduct causes a former participant or beneficiary to lose their status because, here, Plaintiff never enjoyed that status. The case is Sacchi v. Luciani, et al., No. 14-3031, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19002 (D.N.J. Feb. 18, 2015).
