Fifth Circuit Jumps on the Bandwagon, Adopts Effective Vindication Doctrine

[T]he court reversed the district court’s denial of IBC’s motion to compel arbitration as to Parrott’s Section 1132(a)(2) claim because the plan’s unilateral amendment was lawful and applied to Parrott, but affirmed as to Parrott’s individual claims under Section 1132(a)(3) because he did not give consent. Furthermore, the court voided the standard of review provision ‘to the extent it purports to reach breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims,’ and remanded ‘for further proceedings on whether provisions that violate the effective vindication doctrine can be severed.’ ” [Parrott v. International Bancshares Corp., No. 25-50367 (5th Cir. Feb. 10, 2026)]