regarding PECO’s pension plan. The action against PECO was grounded on its alleged violation of fiduciary obligations in its capacity as plan administrator. The district court granted summary judgment for PECO and the plaintiffs appealed. The Fischer panel began its analysis by recognizing that well established case law provides that plan administrators have a fiduciary obligation not to affirmatively misrepresent material facts to plan participants. Fischer, 994 F.2d at 135 (citing Eddy v. Colonial Life Ins. Co., 919 F.2d 747, 751 (D.C.Cir.1990) (“This duty to communicate complete and correct material information about a beneficiary’s status and options is not a novel idea.”)); see also Bixler v. Central Penn. Teamsters Health-Welfare Program, 12 F.3d 1292, 1300 (3d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). The panel restated this obligation in the
recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel recognizing that pension plan administrators have the ability to fashion their own plan formulas recognizing that when a beneficiary requests information from an erisa fiduciary who is aware of the beneficiarys status and situation the fiduciary has an obligation to convey complete and accurate information material to the beneficiarys circumstance even if that requires conveying information about which the beneficiary did not specifically inquire 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 plan administrators have an obligation to convey complete and accurate information material to the beneficiarys circumstances