LaSalle breached the fiduciary duty owed to the plan and may seek damages on behalf of the plan. LaSalle cites In re McKesson HBOC, Inc. ERISA Litig., 2002 WL 31431588 (N.D.Cal.2002), to stand for the proposition that a case he plan, they are granted the power by ERISA section 502(a)(1)(B) to file a claim to recover wrongfully denied benefits. 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). The breach of fiduciary duty claim under section 502(a)(2) is simply an additional claim, not the way around a jurisdictional bar. Count III — Unlawful Plan Amendments Defendants argue that plaintiffs’ claim for unlawful amendments must be dismissed because only Amsted, as the plan’s settlor, had the actual power to amend the plan. See Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Jacobson, 525 U.S. 432, 119 S.Ct. 755, 142 L.Ed.2d 881 (1999) (<HOLDING>). We read count III as to LaSalle as basically
holding that the trustee of a nominee trust functions more as an agent than as a true trustee holding that treating trust rather than trustee as attorneys client is inconsistent with the law of trusts holding that plan amendments are a settlor rather than a trustee function holding that a chapter 7 trustee was the only person with authority to bring  a cause of action after the appointment of a trustee holding that plan language giving plan administrator power to determine which employees are eligible to participate in the plan and providing all parties dealing with the plan an interpretation of plan provisions on request indicates deferential standard of review of trustee eligibility decisions