BARR v. ROSS ISLAND SAND GRAVEL COMPANY (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs appeal the district court's decision granting Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, we affirm. See Daewoo Elecs. Am. Inc. v. Opta Corp., 875 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2017).

Plaintiffs’ First Claim for Relief (Violation of Or. Rev. Stat. § 652.610(3)), Second Claim for Relief (Breach of Fiduciary Duty) and Third Claim for Relief (Conversion) are expressly preempted by section 514(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). See 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a) (providing that ERISA preempts “all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan”).

Plaintiffs’ claim for intentional interference with economic relations is also preempted by Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. See Burnside v. Kiewit Pac. Corp., 491 F.3d 1053, 1059 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[T]he preemptive force of section 301 is so powerful as to displace entirely any state cause of action for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

Because Plaintiffs’ statutory claims are preempted by ERISA § 514, we need not decide whether they provide for a private cause of action.

AFFIRMED.