expensive and 'Underper-forming investment options: at the time the Plan selected the JP Morgan target date funds, JP Morgan Chase Bank was trustee of the Plan, JP Morgan Retirement Plan Services was record-keeper for the Plan, and the 2013-2014 financial disclosures state that “[c]ertain plain investments are managed or significantly influenced by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank N.A.” Id. ¶51 (emphasis in original). Terraza further alleges that this “relationship and influence inappropriately affected and compromised the Plan’s investment op tions.” Id. ¶ 52. When viewed collectively, the Court can reasonably infer from, these allegations that the Defendants engaged in a flawed decision-making process by selecting and retaining the challenged investment options. See Braden, 588 F.3d at 596-98 (<HOLDING>). The Court also notes that, at least with
holding that a plaintiff seeking individual relief under erisa  502a3 under a breach of fiduciary duty theory did not have a cause of action when the alleged breach of fiduciary duty was a failure to distribute benefits in accordance with the plan holding that professionals who advised the plan were not fiduciaries because they had no decision making authority over the plan or plan assets also noting that the power to act for the plan is essential to status as a fiduciary holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for breach of fiduciary duty where he alleged that the plan offered funds that charged higher fees than available alternatives that underperformed during the relevant time period and that were included in the plan because of improper influence by the plans trustee 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 holding a plan administrator is a fiduciary under the disposition clause where it wrongfully disbursed the plans funds