a claimant ... has a reasonable opportunity to appeal a denied claim ... and under which a full and fan-review of the claim and its denial may be obtained. Every such procedure shall include ... provisions that a claimant or his duly authorized representative may: ... (ii) Review pertinent documents.... 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-l(g). As applied to this case, therefore, the obligations of section 1133 are imposed only on benefit “plans.” Because section 1132(c) authorizes the imposition of sanctions only for the failures or refusals of the “plan administrator,” and not those of the “plan,” we hold that section 1132(c) cannot be used to impose civil liability for the violation of section 1133 alleged by Ms. Wilczynski. See Groves v. Modified Retirement Plan, 803 F.2d 109, 116 (3d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); see also Stuhlreyer v. Armco, Inc., 12 F.3d
holding that erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to treating physicians opinions although administrators may not arbitrarily refuse to credit them recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel holding that plan administrators incur no personal liability for failure to fulfil obligations imposed by 29 cfr  25605031g 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 recognizing that pension plan administrators have the ability to fashion their own plan formulas