See Lacoparra v. Pergament Home Centers, Inc., 982 F.Supp. 213, 228 (S.D.N.Y.1997) (Connor, J.). Section 1132(c) “provides that an administrator who fails or refuses to comply with such a request within 30 days may, in the court’s discretion, be held personally liable to the participant.” Id. PDK argues that plaintiffs claim should be dismissed because he did not request a copy of the retirement plan from the plan administrator as required by section 1024(b)(4), but rather mailed letters requesting plan information to PDK’s counsel. The Second Circuit has not directly addressed the question of whether a letter to the plan administrator’s counsel is a proper request for plan information under 29 U.S.C. § 1024(b)(4). Cf. Long Island Lighting Co. v. Becher, 129 F.3d 268 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). However, the Tenth Circuit has explicitly
recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel holding that a plan administrators denial of benefits based on the factual determination about a plan participants cause of death was supported by autopsy report and three medical records and therefore it was a reasonable decision holding that in a recovery of benefits claim only the plan and the administrators and trustees of the plan in their capacity as such may be held liable holding that where plaintiffs alleged that the plan suffered significant losses and requested that fiduciaries make good to the plan the losses to the plan they need not seek to recover for all plan participants allegedly injured by the fiduciary breach recognizing that pension plan administrators have the ability to fashion their own plan formulas