"[The court stated] that their primary job was not to determine whether the pension participant ... affirmatively elected to have his pension calculated under the 'Account Balance' method -- or passively elected to use the default 'Final Average Pay' method by doing nothing. Instead, the 6th Circuit judges said they simply needed to determine whether the benefits committee acted 'arbitrarily and capriciously' in determining that [the participant] elected to use the so-called AB I method. They ruled that the committee did not, affirming an earlier decision in favor of the plan sponsor[.]" [Durbin v. Columbia Energy Group Pension Plan, No. 12-3910 (6th Cir. April 17, 2013)]