The lawsuit didn’t include allegations that the disputed investments in Intel’s plan underperformed other funds with similar goals, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said. Comparisons to “equity-heavy retail funds” that pursued different objectives aren’t enough to show that the Intel committee acted imprudently under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the appeals court said.
Fiduciary imprudence claims based on retirement investments typically require a ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
Learn About Bloomberg Law
AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools.